The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 06-03-20 Meeting Agenda1.Call to Order 2.Adoption of Agenda – Pursuant to established procedures, the Planning Commission should adopt the Agenda for the meeting. 3.Meeting Minutes 4.Committee Reports 5.Citizen Comments 6.Public Hearings 6.A.Rezoning #01-20 for RCS Investments, LLC. Submitted by Greenway Engineering, Inc. to rezone 12.61+/- acres from the M1 (Light Industrial) District to the M2 (Industrial General) District with proffers. The property is located at 220 Imboden Drive (Route 1327) at the terminus of cul-de-sac in the Stonewall Magisterial District and is identified by Property Identification Number 54-7-7A. 6.B.Conditional Use Permit #02-20 for New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T) Submitted to construct a commercial telecommunication facility consisting of a 199-foot monopole telecommunication facility. The property is located at 141 Fairview Road, Gore, Virginia and is identified with Property Identification Number 26-A-29 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 2020 7:00 PM THE BOARD ROOM FREDERICK COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA Rezoning #01-20 for RCS Investments, LLC.pdf 1 6.C.Conditional Use Permit #03-20 for Foxglove Solar LLC Submitted to construct a 668.5-acre (370-acres disturbed area) utility scale solar power generating facility. The properties are generally located along Marlboro Road, Hites Road, Klines Mill Road, Clark Road and Vaucluse Road and are identified with Property Identification Numbers 73-A-21, 84-A-29, 84-A-39, 84-A-40, 84-A-40A and 84-A-50 and in the Back Creek Magisterial District. 6.D.Ordinance Amendment to the Frederick County Code – Chapter 165 Zoning, ARTICLE II Supplementary Use Regulations; Parking; Buffers; and Regulations for Specific Uses; Part 204 Additional Regulations for Specific Uses, §165-204.19. Telecommunication facilities, commercial. Revision to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to reduce the fee for a Conditional Use Permit for commercial telecommunication facilities. 6.E.Ordinance Amendment to the Frederick County Code – Chapter 165 Zoning, ARTICLE I General Provision; Amendments; and Conditional Use Permits; Part 101 General Provisions, §165-101.08 Violations and penalties; enforcement. Revision to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to maximize the penalties for zoning violations. 7.Other CUP#02-20 for New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T).pdf CUP#02-20 NEPA Study OP.pdf 03-20 Staff Report.pdf 03-20 Location Maps.pdf 03-20 Application red.pdf 03-20 Comments red.pdf 03-20 Power of Attorney red.pdf 03-20 Tax Verification.pdf 03-20 Adjacent Property Owners List.pdf 03-20 Adjacent Property Owners Map.pdf 03-20 Impact Analysis Statement.pdf 03-20 Decomissioning Plan.pdf 03-20 Viewshed Analysis.pdf 03-20 Visual Simulation.pdf 03-20 Exhibit A - Protected Species Review.pdf 03-20 Exhibit B - Phase I Environmental Site Assessment.pdf 03-20 Exhibit C - DCR Ltr dated September 22, 2018.pdf 03-20 Exhibit D - Phase I Historical Resources.pdf 03-20 CUP Site Plan.pdf Development Review Fees .pdf Zoning Violations & Penalties.pdf 2 8.Adjourn 3 Board of Supervisors Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: June 3, 2020 Agenda Section: County Officials Title: Rezoning #01-20 for RCS Investments, LLC. Attachments: Rezoning #01-20 for RCS Investments, LLC.pdf 4 REZONING APPLICATION #01-20 RCS Investments, LLC Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: May 22, 2020 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, CZA, Assistant Director Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 06/03/20 Pending Board of Supervisors: 07/08/20 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 12.61+/- acres from the M1 (Light Industrial) District to the M2 (Industrial General) District with proffers. The subject property is part of the Baker Lane Industrial Park which was subdivided in 1985. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 220 Imboden Drive (Route 1327) at the terminus of the cul-de-sac. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 06/03/20 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: This is an application to rezone 12.61+/- acres from the M1 (Light Industrial) District to the M2 (Industrial General) District with proffers. The subject property is part of the Baker Lane Industrial Park. The site is located within the limits of the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan. The Plan identifies the property with an industrial land use designation, therefore the existing M1 Zoning as well as the requested M2 Zoning are consistent with the goals of the Plan. The proffers associated with this rezoning request are as follows: Proffer Statement – Dated March 16, 2020: A. Land Use and Property Development 1. The Owner proffers to limit the land uses on the Property to the following: • All uses allowed in the M-1 Light Industrial District • Recycling Operations (No SIC Code) 2. The owner proffers to prohibit outdoor storage of material utilized in Recycling Operations on the Property. 3. The Owner proffers to prohibit waste transfer stations in conjunction with Recycling Operations on the Property. B. Monetary Contributions The owner proffers to provide a monetary contribution of $0.10 per building square foot for County Fire and Rescue services. A recommendation regarding this rezoning application to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The Applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission. 5 Rezoning #01-20 RCS Investments May 22, 2020 Page 2 This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by Staff where relevant throughout this Staff report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 06/03/20 Pending Board of Supervisors: 07/08/20 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 12.61+/- acres from the M1 (Light Industrial) District to the M2 (Industrial General) District with proffers. The subject property is part of the Baker Lane Industrial Park which was subdivided in 1985. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 220 Imboden Drive (Route 1327) at terminus of cul-de- sac. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 54-7-7A PROPERTY ZONING: M1 (Light Industrial) District PRESENT USE: Industrial/Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: MH-1 (Mobile Home Community) District Use: Residential M1 (Light Industrial) District Use: Industrial South: RP (Residential Performance) District Use: Residential M1 (Light Industrial) District Use: Industrial East: Interstate 81 Use: N/A West: M1 (Light Industrial) District Use: Industrial 6 Rezoning #01-20 RCS Investments May 22, 2020 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have little measurable impact on Route 1327 (Imboden Drive). The route is the VDOT roadway, which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. The existing entrance is adequate for the proposed use. Frederick Water: Please see letter from Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Executive Director dated February 5, 2020. Frederick-Winchester Service Authority: FWSA defers comments to Frederick Water. Frederick County Department of Public Works: Please see letter from Gloria M. Puffinburger, Solid Waste Manager dated April 20, 2020. Frederick County Department of Inspections: No comments at this time. Frederick County Fire Marshall: Plan approved. Winchester Regional Airport: No comment. County of Frederick Attorney: I have reviewed the proposed proffer statement you submitted for the above proposed rezoning and find that, subject to one comment, the proposed proffer statement is legally sufficient and in proper form to serve as a proffer statement. The one comment is that, because approved proffer statements are recorded in the land records, they must meet recoding standards. Relative to the proposed proffer statement, the Clerk’s Office will not record the cover page with the aerial picture. This in turn means that the page numbers on the remainder will need to be removed or restart at “1” , as the “2” on the first page will create confusion. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identified the subject property as being zoned M2. The property was downzoned from the M2 District to the R-3 District in 1980 with the Comprehensive Rezoning of Frederick County. The property was rezoned to the M1 District with rezoning #06-84 which was approved by the Board of Supervisors on July 11, 1984. 2) Comprehensive Plan The 2035 Comprehensive Plan is the guide for the future growth of Frederick County. The 2035 Comprehensive Plan is an official public document that serves as the Community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key 7 Rezoning #01-20 RCS Investments May 22, 2020 Page 4 components of Community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. The Area Plans, Appendix I of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan, are the primary implementation tool and will be instrumental to the future planning efforts of the County. Land Use The 2035 Comprehensive Plan and the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan provide guidance on the future development of the property. The property is located within the SWSA. The 2035 Comprehensive Plan identifies this property with an industrial land use designation. In general, the proposed M2 Zoning is consistent with the land use supported by the Comprehensive Plan. 3) Proffer Statement– Dated March 16, 2020: A. Land Use and Property Development 1. The Owner proffers to limit the land uses on the Property to the following: • All uses allowed in the M-1 Light Industrial District • Recycling Operations (No SIC Code) 2. The owner proffers to prohibit outdoor storage of material utilized in Recycling Operations on the Property. 3. The Owner proffers to prohibit waste transfer stations in conjunction with Recycling Operations on the Property. B. Monetary Contributions The owner proffers to provide a monetary contribution of $0.10 per building square foot for County Fire and Rescue services A recommendation regarding this rezoning application to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The Applicant should be prepared to adequately address all co ncerns raised by the Planning Commission. 8 §¨¦81§¨¦81 54 7 7A 211BARRINGTON LN 304BARRINGTON LN 314STRATFORD DR 521BRAEBURN DR 519BRAEBURN DR 400GATEWAY DR 216REGENCYLAKES DR 216REGENCYLAKES DR 314BANBURY TER 301BARRINGTON LN 314BARRINGTON LN 315STRATFORD DR 413BRAEBURN DR 507BRAEBURN DR 509BRAEBURN DR 320BANBURY TER 326BANBURY TER 112BRAEBURN DR311BARRINGTON LN 313BRAEBURN DR 315BRAEBURN DR 403BRAEBURN DR 411BRAEBURN DR 100BRAEBURN DR 102BRAEBURN DR 215BRAEBURN DR303BRAEBURN DR 203BRAEBURN DR201BRAEBURN DR 213BRAEBURN DR 312SUTTON CT314SUTTON CT 415BANBURYTER 101BRAEBURN DR 107BRAEBURN DR 214SUTTON CT302SUTTON CT 202SUTTON CT 200SUTTON CT 210SUTTON CT 313SUTTON CT315SUTTON CT 882BAKER LN 100SUTTON CT 102SUTTON CT 108SUTTON CT 114SUTTON CT 200IMBODEN DR 215SUTTON CT 213SUTTON CT 301SUTTON CT 601BANBURY TER 603BANBURY TER 201SUTTON CT 203SUTTON CT 611BANBURYTER 701BANBURY TER 101SUTTON CT 103SUTTON CT 111SUTTON CT 172IMBODEN DR 709BANBURYTER 160IMBODEN DR 178IMBODEN DR 130IMBODEN DR 183IMBODEN DR 159IMBODEN DR 135IMBODEN DR 960BAKER LN 1239HAINES DR 1239HAINES DR 1239HAINES DR B A R R I N G T O N L N B A N B U R Y T E R BRAEBURN DR HAINES DR SUTTON CT IMBODEN DR Application Parcels Sewer and Water Service A rea B2 (General Business District) M1 (Light Industrial District) MH1 (Mobile Hom e Com m unity District) RP (Residential Per form ance District)µ Frederick C ounty Planning & Development107 N Kent StWinchester, V A 22601540 - 665 - 5651Map Created: April 24, 2020 Winchester B A K E R L N A M Y A V E M U S E D R HAINES DRIMBODEN DR B A N B U R Y T E R REGENCY LAKES DR S T R A T F O R D D R A R T I F A C T A V E G E T T Y L N SMITH DR A V E R R E L L A V E M U L L I G A N L N 0 300 600150 Feet R E Z # 0 1 - 2 0 : R C S I n v e s t m e n t s , L L CPIN: 5 4 - 7 - 7 ARezoning f r o m M 1 t o M 2Zoning M a p REZ #01-20 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 9 §¨¦81§¨¦81 54 7 7A 211BARRINGTON LN 304BARRINGTON LN 314STRATFORD DR 519BRAEBURN DR 521BRAEBURN DR 400GATEWAY DR 216REGENCYLAKES DR 216REGENCYLAKES DR 314BANBURY TER 301BARRINGTON LN 314BARRINGTON LN 315STRATFORD DR 413BRAEBURN DR 507BRAEBURN DR 509BRAEBURN DR 320BANBURY TER 326BANBURY TER 112BRAEBURN DR311BARRINGTON LN 313BRAEBURN DR 315BRAEBURN DR 403BRAEBURN DR 411BRAEBURN DR 100BRAEBURN DR 102BRAEBURN DR 215BRAEBURN DR303BRAEBURN DR 201BRAEBURN DR 203BRAEBURN DR 213BRAEBURN DR 312SUTTON CT314SUTTON CT 415BANBURYTER 101BRAEBURN DR 107BRAEBURN DR 214SUTTON CT302SUTTON CT 202SUTTON CT 200SUTTON CT 210SUTTON CT 313SUTTON CT315SUTTON CT 882BAKER LN 100SUTTON CT 102SUTTON CT 108SUTTON CT 114SUTTON CT 200IMBODEN DR 213SUTTON CT215SUTTON CT 301SUTTON CT 601BANBURY TER 603BANBURY TER 201SUTTON CT 203SUTTON CT 611BANBURYTER 701BANBURY TER 101SUTTON CT 103SUTTON CT 111SUTTON CT 172IMBODEN DR 709BANBURYTER 160IMBODEN DR 178IMBODEN DR 130IMBODEN DR 183IMBODEN DR 159IMBODEN DR 135IMBODEN DR 960BAKER LN 1239HAINES DR 1239HAINES DR 1239HAINES DR B A R R I N G T O N L N B A N B U R Y T E R BRAEBURN DR HAINES DR SUTTON CT IMBODEN DR Application Parcels Sewer and Water Service A rea µ Frederick C ounty Planning & Development107 N Kent StWinchester, V A 22601540 - 665 - 5651Map Created: April 24, 2020 Winchester B A K E R L N A M Y A V E M U S E D R HAINES DRIMBODEN DR B A N B U R Y T E R REGENCY LAKES DR S T R A T F O R D D R A R T I F A C T A V E G E T T Y L N SMITH DR A V E R R E L L A V E M U L L I G A N L N 0 300 600150 Feet R E Z # 0 1 - 2 0 : R C S I n v e s t m e n t s , L L CPIN: 5 4 - 7 - 7 ARezoning f r o m M 1 t o M 2Location M a p REZ #01-20 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 10 §¨¦81§¨¦81 54 7 7A 535FORTCOLLIER RD 211BARRINGTON LN 304BARRINGTON LN 314STRATFORD DR316STRATFORD DR 521BRAEBURN DR 400GATEWAY DR 216REGENCYLAKES DR 222BANBURY TER 316BANBURYTER 301BARRINGTON LN 315STRATFORD DR 507BRAEBURN DR 515BRAEBURN DR 324BANBURYTER 311BARRINGTON LN 112BRAEBURN DR 313BRAEBURN DR 315BRAEBURN DR 403BRAEBURN DR 102BRAEBURN DR 215BRAEBURN DR 305BRAEBURN DR 201BRAEBURN DR 203BRAEBURN DR 213BRAEBURN DR 312SUTTON CT 314SUTTON CT 411BANBURYTER 415BANBURY TER 101BRAEBURN DR 107BRAEBURN DR 212SUTTON CT 214SUTTON CT 302SUTTON CT 204SUTTON CT 202SUTTON CT 313SUTTON CT315SUTTON CT 882BAKER LN 100SUTTON CT 100SUTTON CT102SUTTON CT 112SUTTON CT 114SUTTON CT 200IMBODEN DR 213SUTTON CT 215SUTTON CT301SUTTON CT 307SUTTON CT 601BANBURY TER 603BANBURY TER 113SUTTON CT 201SUTTON CT 203SUTTON CT 611BANBURYTER 701BANBURY TER 101SUTTON CT 103SUTTON CT 172IMBODEN DR 709BANBURYTER 160IMBODEN DR 178IMBODEN DR 130IMBODEN DR 183IMBODEN DR 159IMBODEN DR 135IMBODEN DR 960BAKER LN 1239HAINES DR 1239HAINES DR 1239HAINES DR B A R R I N G T O N L N B A N B U R Y T E R BRAEBURN DR HAINES DR SUTTON CT IMBODEN DR Application Parcels Sewer and Water Service A reaLong R ange Land Use Residential Neighborhood Village Urban Center Mo bile Home Community Business Highway Commercial Mixed-Use Mixed Use Commercial/O ffice Mixed Use Industrial/O ffice Industrial Warehouse Heavy Industrial Extractive Mining Commercial Rec Rural Community Center Fire & Rescue Sensitive Natural Areas Institutional Planned Unit Development Park Recreation School Employment Airport S upport Area B2 / B3 Residential, 4 u/a High-Density Residential, 6 u/a High-Density Residential, 12-16 u/a Rural Area Interstate Buffer Landfill Support Area Natural Resources & Recreation Environmental & Recreational Resources µ Frederick C ounty Planning & Development107 N Kent StWinchester, V A 22601540 - 665 - 5651Map Created: April 24, 2020 Winchester B A K E R L N A M Y A V E M U S E D R HAINES DRIMBODEN DR B A N B U R Y T E R REGENCY LAKES DR S T R A T F O R D D R A R T I F A C T A V E G E T T Y L N SMITH DR A V E R R E L L A V E M U L L I G A N L N 0 300 600150 Feet R E Z # 0 1 - 2 0 : R C S I n v e s t m e n t s , L L CPIN: 5 4 - 7 - 7 ARezoning f r o m M 1 t o M 2Long R a n g e L a n d U s e M a p REZ #01-20 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 11 12 13 14 315 Tasker Road PH (540) 868-1061 Eric R. Lawrence Stephens City, Virginia 22655 Fax (540) 868-1429 Executive Director www.FrederickWater.com Water At Your Service February 5, 2020 Evan Wyatt Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 RE: Rezoning Application Comment RCS Investments, Inc. Tax Map Numbers: 54-7-7A 12.61 +/- acres Dear Mr. Wyatt: Thank you for the opportunity to offer review comments on the RCS Investments industrial commercial rezoning application package, dated January 21, 2020. Frederick Water (FW) offers comments limited to the anticipated impact/effect upon FW’s public water and sanitary sewer system and the demands thereon. The project parcel is in the sewer and water service area (SWSA). The parcel is currently served by FW, and the rezoning and proposed recycling use does not anticipate significant increases in water and sewer use. Therefore, the proposed use does not appear to impact FW’s water and sewer service. Any proposed construction on the property must avoid the existing water and sewer easements on the property. Thank you for the opportunity to offer review comments. Sincerely, Eric R. Lawrence Executive Director 15 April 20, 2020 Mr. Evan Wyatt Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 RE: Proposed Rezoning for RCS Investments, LLC Property Identification Number (PIN): 54-7-7A – Imboden Drive Dear Evan: After careful review of the above request of the above request and proposed proffer statement dated January 21, 2020, with the intent to develop a recycling operation, I submit the following: ▪ Transportation: Facility is anticipated to generate 10-12 new vehicle trips per week. In the event that the Frederick County utilizes this facility for the marketing of its materials (cardboard, metal cans, plastic bottles and jugs), approximately 20 inbound vehicle trips would be made each week. This is in addition to trips by other localities, such as the City of Winchester, which would add another six inbound vehicle trips per week for its co-mingled materials and cardboard. ▪ Solid Waste Disposal: Recycling Operations Facility is anticipated to generate approximately 10-12 new vehicle trips per week. This statement may only refer to the vehicle trips made by the applicant for its current needs. However, if it is the applicant’s desire to bring in outside customers, logically, this number will be considerable higher. Although it is most desirable to receive and process clean materials, some residue is unavoidable. Based on industry standards, up to ten percent of all material received at the proposed facility will be culled out as unrecyclable and deposited at the regional landfill. Therefore, impacts to the local landfill and associated waste is a percentage of materials processed. The department would recommend that contractual agreements be put into place by the owner and those utilizing the facility to reject loads that consistently exhibit contamination levels exceeding ten percent. ▪ Other Potential Impacts: Maintaining a high standard of quality as it pertains to materials received for processing wi ll curtail processing costs on the part of the applicant and limit impacts to the Frederick County Regional Landfill. The department supports the operation of an economically viable recycling facility with indoor storage which will mitigate any impact to surrounding properties while potentially serving the needs of area localities and businesses with a local, reliable and sustainable market for recyclables collected across the region. Sincerely Gloria M. Puffinburger Solid Waste Manager cc: Joe Wilder, director file 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 RCS INVESTMENTS, LLC REZONING IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT Tax Parcel 54-7-7A Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia March 16, 2020 Current Owner: RCS Investments, LLC Contact Person: Evan Wyatt, Director of Land Planning Greenway Engineering, Inc. 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 540-662-4185 24 Greenway Engineering March 16, 2020 RCS Investments, LLC Rezoning File #2131R/ Impact Analysis Statement/EAW 2 RCS INVESTMENTS, LLC REZONING IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared for the purpose of assessing the impact on Fredrick County by the proffered rezoning of a 12.61±-acre subject property owned by RCS Investments, LLC identified as Tax Map Parcel 54-7-7A. The subject property is located on the northeast side of Imboden Drive (Route 1327) and adjacent to Interstate 81. The 12.61± acre subject property is currently zoned M-1 Light Industrial District and the Owner proposes to rezone the subject property to M-2 Industrial General District with proffers to allow for the construction of a new building that is projected to be 30,000 square feet in area that will allow for internal storage and processing of collected clean, reusable recycled materials. The Frederick County Zoning Administrator issued a Zoning Determination Letter dated December 5, 2019 advising that Recycling Operation land uses are permitted within the M-2 Industrial General District only and the subject property would be required to be rezoned for the proposed land use. Basic information Location: Fronting on the northeast side of Imboden Drive (Route 1327) adjacent to Interstate 81 Magisterial District: Stonewall District Property ID Numbers: 54-7-7A Current Zoning: M-1, Light Industrial District Current Use: Office; Transportation Services; Transportation Fleet Parking and Container Storage Proposed Zoning: M-2, Industrial General District Proposed Use: M-1 District permitted land use and Recycling Operations Total Rezoning Area: 12.61±-acres with proffers 25 Greenway Engineering March 16, 2020 RCS Investments, LLC Rezoning File #2131R/ Impact Analysis Statement/EAW 3 COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN Urban Development Area The Urban Development Area (UDA) defines the general area in which residential, commercial, industrial and institutional land use development is encouraged in the County. The 12.61± acre subject property is currently located within the UDA; therefore, expansion of the UDA boundary to accommodate the proposed development of the subject property is not required for this rezoning application. Sewer and Water Service Area The Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) is generally consistent with the UDA, but also extends outside of the UDA to accommodate areas of the County in which commercial and industrial land use development is only desired. The 12.61± acre subject property is currently located within the SWSA; therefore, expansion of the SWSA boundary to accommodate the proposed development of the subject property is not required for this rezoning application. Comprehensive Plan Conformity The RCS Investments, LLC 12.61± acre subject property is a component of the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan (NFLUP) which is a large area plan within the County’s Comprehensive Policy Plan. The subject property is located within the southern area of the land use plan and is identified as industrial land use based on its current zoning and development condition. Adjoining properties are identified as industrial and residential land use and are developed as office, warehouse and manufacturing; a townhouse subdivision and a mobile home park. The 12.61±-acre subject property is zoned M1 Light Industrial District and the Owner has proffered to limit land uses to those permitted in the M1 District and Recycling Operations that prohibit waste transfer stations and prohibit the outdoor storage of recycled materials used in the Recycling Operations. Therefore, the proposed industrial rezoning of the subject property would be in conformity with the Comprehensive Policy Plan and would be compatible with adjoining properties. SUITABILITY OF THE SITE Access The 12.61±-acre subject property is located on the northeast side of Imboden Drive (Route 1327) and is adjacent to Interstate 81. Imboden Drive is a two-lane state-maintained road which serves as access to the subject property and other developed industrial properties. Greenway Engineering met with the County Transportation Director to discuss the proposed rezoning and proffered land use restrictions and it was determined that the existing transportation network was sufficient to accommodate the future development of the subject property. Greenway Engineering prepared a traffic impact analysis waiver request dated 26 Greenway Engineering March 16, 2020 RCS Investments, LLC Rezoning File #2131R/ Impact Analysis Statement/EAW 4 December 19, 2019 which was approved by the County Transportation Director on January 21, 2020. Flood Plains The 12.61±-acre subject property does not contain areas of floodplain as demonstrated on FEMA NFIP Map #51069C0209D, Effective Date September 2, 2009; as well as information from the Frederick County GIS Database. Wetlands The 12.61±-acre subject property does not contain wetland areas as demonstrated on the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map and information from the Frederick County GIS Database. Soil Types The 12.61±-acre subject property contains three soil types as demonstrated by the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia and the Frederick County GIS Database. The following soil types are present on site: 1B Berks Channery Silt Loams 2-7% slope 9B Clearbrook Channery Silt Loams 2-7% slope 41C & 41E Weikert-Berks Channery Silt Loams 7-65% slope None of the soil types on the subject property are identified as prime agricultural soils. The Berks Channery Silt Loam is the predominant soil type on the subject property and is considered moderate soils for the construction of small commercial buildings based on slope and wetness properties. This soil type is conducive for industrial development as evident by existing structural development on the subject property and adjacent to the subject property. Other Environmental Features The 12.61±-acre subject property does not contain areas of steep slope, lakes or ponds or natural stormwater retention areas as defined by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. There are no known environmental features present that create development constraints for the subject property. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES Adjoining property zoning and present use: North: MH-1 Mobile Home District Use: Mobile Home Park South: RP Residential Performance District Use: Townhouse Subdivision 27 Greenway Engineering March 16, 2020 RCS Investments, LLC Rezoning File #2131R/ Impact Analysis Statement/EAW 5 East: No Zoning Designation Use: Interstate 81 West: M-1, Light Industrial District Use: Office; Warehousing and Manufacturing TRANSPORTATION The 12.61±-acre subject property is located on the northeast side of Imboden Drive (Route 1327) and is adjacent to Interstate 81. The proposed rezoning from the M-1 Light Industrial District to the M-2 Industrial General District is intended to allow for the construction of a new building that is projected to be 30,000 square feet in area that will allow for internal storage and processing of collected clean, reusable recycled materials. These recycled materials will be unloaded, baled and warehoused internally to the proposed Recycling Operations Facility for distribution. The Owner’s Proffer Statement limits the land uses on the subject property to allowed land uses within the M-1 District and to Recycling Operations. Additionally, the Owner’s Proffer Statement prohibits waste transfer stations in conjunction with the Recycling Operations and prohibits the outdoor storage of materials utilized in Recycling Operations. RCS Investments, LLC currently utilizes 220 Imboden Drive for the parking of their vehicle fleet including trucks used in their collection operations; as well as for the storage of empty collection containers. The development of the proposed 30,000 square feet Recycling Operations Facility is anticipated to generate approximately 10-12 new vehicle trips per week from the subject property in conjunction with the distribution portion of the business operation. These additional vehicle trips will utilize Imboden Drive, Baker Lane and Fort Collier Road to access primary arterial roads and Interstate 81. This transportation network involves existing public road systems that can accommodate distribution traffic. Additionally, the distribution vehicle trips will occur during business operation hours which will not necessarily occur during the AM/PM Peak Hour traffic periods. Greenway Engineering met with the Frederick County Transportation Planning Director to discuss the proposed rezoning application and the additional traffic generation projections for the proposed 30,000 square feet Recycling Operations Facility. The Frederick County Transportation Planning Director determined that a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) would not be required and provided a TIA waiver for the proposed rezoning application on January 21, 2020 based on the following considerations: ➢ The Owner’s Proffer Statement will restrict the property to land uses currently permitted in the M-1 District and to a Recycling Operations Facility with restrictions as a condition of rezoning to the M-2 District. ➢ The location of Tax Map Parcel 54-7-7A creates a constraint which will significantly limit the potential to expand of the proposed facility. ➢ The projected increase in vehicle trips associated with the distribution portion of the proposed facility is insignificant and will result in some new vehicle trips occurring during off-peak hours. 28 Greenway Engineering March 16, 2020 RCS Investments, LLC Rezoning File #2131R/ Impact Analysis Statement/EAW 6 ➢ The existing transportation network has been demonstrated to adequately accommodate distribution traffic. The Owner’s Proffer Statement provides for land use limitations and restrictions that will adequately mitigate transportation impacts associated with this rezoning proposal for the 12.61±-acre subject property. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT The 12.61±-acre subject property is located within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA); therefore, the property is entitled to be served by public sewer based on County Policy. Frederick Water is the provider of public sewer service and owns and maintains the public sewer infrastructure within this area of the County. Frederick Water has existing sewer infrastructure in place that serves the various land uses within proximity of the subject property and has an existing sewer easement on the subject property for a gravity main collection system. The gravity main collection system directs sewer effluent to the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Facility (OWTF) which has a total capacity of 12.6 MGD, of which 5.475 MGD is allocated to Frederick Water. RCS Investments, LLC desires to construct a 30,000 square-foot Recycling Operation that will allow for internal storage and processing of clean, reusable recycled materials that will baled and warehoused for distribution. The proposed facility will not be a sewer intensive land use; however, Greenway Engineering has utilized standard industrial land use calculations for the sewer demand projections specific to this rezoning application. Q = 75 gallons/day per 1,000 square feet industrial Q = 75 GPD x 30 (30,000 sq.ft./1,000 sq.ft.) Q = 2,250 GPD TOTAL: Q = 2,250 GPD projected sewer demand The Opequon Wastewater Treatment Facility has a total capacity of 12.6 MGD, of which 5.475 MGD is allocated to Frederick Water. Frederick Water currently averages approximately 2.63 MGD of the allocated capacity and has approximately 2.845 MGD of allocated capacity available for future development projects. The projected 2,250 GPD for the 12.61±-acre rezoning represents 0.08% of available treatment capacity; therefore, the proposed rezoning can be sufficiently accommodated by public sewer service through a system with adequate conveyance, capacity and treatment. WATER SUPPLY The subject property is located within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA); therefore, the property is entitled to be served by public water based on County Policy. Frederick Water is the provider of public water service and owns and maintains the public water 29 Greenway Engineering March 16, 2020 RCS Investments, LLC Rezoning File #2131R/ Impact Analysis Statement/EAW 7 infrastructure within this area of the County. Frederick Water has an existing 8-inch water line located along Imboden Drive that serves the 12.61±-acre subject property. RCS Investments, LLC desires to construct a 30,000 square-foot Recycling Operation that will allow for internal storage and processing of clean, reusable recycled materials that will baled and warehoused for distribution. The proposed facility will not be a water intensive land use; however, Greenway Engineering has utilized standard industrial land use calculations for the water demand projections specific to this rezoning application. Q = 75 gallons/day per 1,000 square feet industrial Q = 75 GPD x 30 (30,000 sq.ft./1,000 sq.ft.) Q = 2,250 GPD TOTAL: Q = 2,250 GPD projected sewer demand Frederick Water obtains potable water from local quarries which are treated at the Diehl Filtration Plant (3.2 MGD) and the Anderson Filtration Plant (4.0 MGD). Additionally, Frederick Water is implementing the Opequon Water Supply Plan (OWSP) that will provide an additional 8.0 MGD of potable water during the initial construction phase which in currently underway. Frederick Water has sufficient water capacity to serve the subject property based on current and future demands. Additionally, Frederick Water has existing infrastructure that provides adequate transmission of potable water with adequate water pressure for land use and fire demands. Therefore, the proposed rezoning can be sufficiently accommodated by public water service with adequate conveyance and pressure. SITE DRAINAGE The topographic relief on the 12.61±-acre subject property generally follows a west-to- southwest pattern which directs drainage towards the rear of the property. A stormwater management system was previously developed which directs stormwater through an existing 20-foot drainage easement from Imboden Drive along the southwestern boundary of the subject property towards a stream channel within the Huntington Meadows Subdivision. This stream channel directs stormwater under Interstate 81 towards Berryville Pike (U.S. Route 7) and flows to the Opequon Creek. Development of the projected 30,000 square-foot Recycling Operation Facility will increase impervious area on the 12.61±-acre subject property; therefore, stormwater quality and quantity will be evaluated, and appropriate measures will be implemented on-site to mitigate stormwater impacts. The Owner will work with the Department of Public Works during the Site Development Plan process to identify stormwater volumes from the proposed development of the subject property to ensure that there are no detrimental impacts to the regional stormwater management channel and to adjoining properties. All stormwater management plans and erosion and sedimentation control plans associated with the development of the subject property will be required to be designed in conformance with all 30 Greenway Engineering March 16, 2020 RCS Investments, LLC Rezoning File #2131R/ Impact Analysis Statement/EAW 8 applicable state and local regulations; therefore, site drainage and stormwater management impacts to adjoining properties and the community will be mitigated. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL The impact on solid waste disposal facilities associated with the development of the proposed industrial land use on the 12.61±-acre portion of the subject property proposed for rezoning can be projected from an average annual commercial consumption of 5.4 cubic yards per 1,000 square feet of structural area (Civil Engineering Reference Manual, 4th edition). It is anticipated that the buildout of the Recycling Operation Facility will yield 30,000 square feet of new land use; therefore, solid waste disposal impacts are based on the following projections that provide the increase in average annual solid waste volume for the proposed rezoning: AAV = 5.4 cu. yd. per 1,000 sq. ft. industrial AAV = 5.4 cu. yd. x 30 (30,000 sq.ft./1,000 sq. ft.) AAV = 162 cu. yd. at build-out, or 113.4 tons/yr. at build-out The Municipal Solid Waste area of the Regional Landfill has a current remaining capacity of 13,100,000 cubic yards of air space. The projected commercial development will generate approximately 113.4 tons of solid waste annually on average. This represents a 0.056% increase in the annual solid waste received by the Municipal Solid Waste area of the Regional Landfill, which currently averages 200,000 tons per year. Solid waste produced by the industrial development will be disposed at the Regional Landfill by a commercial waste hauler; therefore, the County will receive tipping fees associated with this land use to mitigate this impact. The Regional Landfill has adequate capacity to accommodate the solid waste impacts associated with this rezoning proposal. HISTORICAL SITES AND STRUCTURES The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey identifies the Third Battle of Winchester Property (#34-456) within proximity of the 12.61±-acre subject property proposed for rezoning. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey identifies the Third Battle of Winchester Property as already on the state and national register of historic places and approximately 447 acres of this property has been purchased by the Civil War Preservation Trust. This property is located on the east side of Interstate 81 and adjoins land that is developed as residential, commercial and institutional land use. The National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley identifies the 12.61±-acre subject property proposed for rezoning as being located within the defined Opequon (Third Winchester) core battlefield area. The National Park Service Study further identifies the subject property and all developed properties on the west side of Interstate 81 as areas of lost integrity resulting from intensive urban development in this portion of the County and the City of Winchester. 31 Greenway Engineering March 16, 2020 RCS Investments, LLC Rezoning File #2131R/ Impact Analysis Statement/EAW 9 The development of additional industrial land use on the 12.61±-acre subject property proposed for rezoning is consistent with other properties in this area of the County. The Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan (NFLUP) does not identify the subject property as historic or as developmentally sensitive area. The proposed rezoning of the property will not create negative impacts associated with historic properties and historic resources. OTHER POTENTIAL IMPACTS The development of the 12.61±-acre portion of the subject property proposed for rezoning will a allow for the development of a 30,000 square-foot Recycling Operation for internal storage and processing of clean, reusable recycled materials that will baled and warehoused for distribution. This proposal will provide new economic development opportunities for Frederick County and will assist Frederick County in reducing impacts to the Regional Landfill. It is recognized that the development of industrial land use has the potential to increase service demands on fire and rescue services; therefore, the Owner’s Proffer Statement provides a monetary contribution of $0.10 per developed building square foot to the County to provide additional revenues that are specifically directed to fire and rescue services. There are no other identified potential impacts above those discussed in this Impact Analysis Statement that would be detrimental to surrounding properties or to the County from the rezoning and development of the 12.61±-acre subject property. 32 Board of Supervisors Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: June 3, 2020 Agenda Section: County Officials Title: Conditional Use Permit #02-20 for New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T) Attachments: CUP#02-20 for New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T).pdf CUP#02-20 NEPA Study OP.pdf 33 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #02-20 New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T) Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: May 14, 2020 Staff Contact: Mark Cheran, Zoning Administrator This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 06/03/20 Pending Board of Supervisors: 07/08/20 Pending EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a commercial telecommunication facility consisting of a 199-foot monopole telecommunication facility and accessory structures. Should the Planning Commission find the use to be appropriate, Staff would suggest the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. The tower shall be available for collocating personal wireless services providers. 3. A minor site plan shall be approved by Frederick County. 4. The tower shall be removed by the Applicant or property owner within twelve (12) months of abandonment of operation. 5. In the event a telecommunications tower is not erected within twelve (12) months of the approval of this Conditional Use Permit, the CUP will be deemed invalid. 6. Any expansion or modification of this use will require a new Conditional Use Permit. Following this public hearing, it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to offer a recommendation concerning this application to the Board of Supervisors. 34 Page 2 CUP #02-20 New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T) May 14, 2020 LOCATION: This property is located at 141 Fairview Road, Gore, Virginia. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 26-A-29 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential South: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential East: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Vacant PROPOSED USE: This is a request for a Conditional Use Permit to enable the construction of a 199-foot Monopole-Type Commercial Telecommunications Facility. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation: The application for a Conditional Use Permit for this property appears to have little measurable impact on Route 733, (Fairview Road), the VDOT facility providing access to the property. A location has been identified for a low-volume commercial entrance on Route 733. The new entrance will need to meet VDOT standards for the proposed use. Should the use ever expand in the future, the entrance will need to be reviewed, to determine if additional improvements may be required. Frederick County Inspections: The Tower foundation and related building and/or structures shall comply with the Virginia Building Code. Tower shall be designed in accordance with the provisions of the TIA-222 and shall be of noncombustible material. Towers shall be located such that guy wires and other accessories shall not cross or encroach upon any street or other public spaces, or over above-ground electric utility lines without written consent. Access to the tower sites shall be limited as required by applicable OSHA, FCC, and EPA. Section 102.3 Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code (USBC) addresses the exempts equipment, related wiring, and structures supporting the related wiring installed by a provider of publicly regulated utility service or a franchised cable television operator and electrical equipment and related wiring used for radio, broadcast or cable television, telecommunications 35 Page 3 CUP #02-20 New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T) May 14, 2020 or information service transmission. The exemption shall apply only if under applicable federal and state law the ownership and control of the equipment and wiring is by the service provider or its affiliates. Such exempt equipment and wiring shall be located on either public rights-of-way or private property for which the service provider has rights of occupancy and entry; however, the structures, including their service equipment, housing, or supporting such exempt equipment and wiring shall be subject to the USBC. The installation of equipment and wiring exempted by this section shall not create an unsafe condition prohibited by the USBC. The replacement of or retro fitting of existing fiber distribution boxes falls under this exception as well. Please note that the exemption of permitting does not apply to building structures erected or remodeled on these sites. The tower, foundation and any other related buildings/structures require permits. Winchester-Frederick County Health Department: The office has no objections provided the facility will be “unmanned” as mentioned in the statement of Compliance and Justification. Frederick County Fire Marshall: Plans disapproved by Frederick County Fire Marshal, Adam Hounshell. The Fire Marshal comments will be addressed by the Applicant at time of site plan approval. Winchester Regional Airport: No comment. Frederick Water: Parcel is outside of the Sewer Water Service Area (SWSA). Frederick Water has no comments. Planning and Zoning: The 2035 Comprehensive Policy Plan of Frederick County (“Comprehensive Plan”) provides guidance when considering any land use action. This proposed 199-foot monopole-type commercial telecommunication facility is located on a 14+/- acre property that is zoned RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area of the County to remain rural and is not part of any current land use study. The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance allows for commercial telecommunication facilities in the RA Zoning District with an approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The properties immediately adjacent to this proposed CUP are currently zoned RA Zoning District. The zoning ordinance requires that all proposed telecommunication facilities be subject to additional performance standards in order to promote orderly economic development and mitigate the negative impacts to adjoining properties, residential properties, land use patterns, scenic areas and properties of significant historic value. Furthermore, the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requires an Applicant to provide confirmation that an attempt was made to collocate on an existing telecommunication facility, and possible collocation structures. The Applicant has provided an inventory of existing telecommunication facilities, and no other telecommunication facility or possible collocation opportunity structures exist in this area. Should this facility be approved this commercial telecommunication facility will be positioned to provide the existing and future land uses in this area of the County with telecommunication needs. 36 Page 4 CUP #02-20 New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T) May 14, 2020 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 06/03/20 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Should the Planning Commission find this use appropriate, Staff would suggest the following conditions be placed on the CUP: 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. The tower shall be available for collocating personal wireless services providers. 3. A minor site plan shall be approved by Frederick County. 4. The tower shall be removed by the Applicant or property owner within twelve (12) months of abandonment of operation. 5. In the event a telecommunications tower is not erected within twelve (12) months of the approval of this Conditional Use Permit, the CUP will be deemed invalid. 6. Any expansion or modification of this use will require a new Conditional Use Permit Following this public hearing, it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to offer a recommendation concerning this application to the Board of Supervisors. 37 £¤50 26 A 29 8909NORTHWESTERNPIKE 125FLETCHER RD 135FLETCHER RD 8811NORTHWESTERNPIKE 8803NORTHWESTERNPIKE 8836NORTHWESTERNPIKE 119FAIRVIEW RD 180FAIRVIEW RD 8660NORTHWESTERNPIKE 8938NORTHWESTERNPIKE 8962NORTHWESTERNPIKE 189FAIRVIEW RD 197FAIRVIEW RD 214FAIRVIEW RD 142KENWORTH DR 236FAIRVIEW RD 260FAIRVIEW RD 261FAIRVIEW RD 263FAIRVIEW RD 280FAIRVIEW RD 271FAIRVIEW RD 312FAIRVIEW RD 293FAIRVIEW RD 309FAIRVIEW RD 315FAIRVIEW RD175NIXON DR 323FAIRVIEW RD F L E T C H E R R D N O R T H W E S T E R N P I K E F A I R V I E W R D Application Parcels µ Frederick C ounty Planning & Development107 N Kent StWinchester, V A 22601540 - 665 - 5651Map Created: April 1, 2020 F A I R V I E W R D NORTHWESTERN PIKE NIXON DR E V E L Y N L E E L N £¤50 0 350 700175 Feet £¤50 HAMPSHIRECOUNTY CUP # 02 - 20: New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLCPIN: 26 - A - 29Cell TowerZoning Map CUP #02-20 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 Board of Supervisors Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: June 3, 2020 Agenda Section: County Officials Title: Conditional Use Permit #03-20 for Foxglove Solar LLC Attachments: 03-20 Staff Report.pdf 03-20 Location Maps.pdf 03-20 Application red.pdf 03-20 Comments red.pdf 03-20 Power of Attorney red.pdf 03-20 Tax Verification.pdf 03-20 Adjacent Property Owners List.pdf 03-20 Adjacent Property Owners Map.pdf 03-20 Impact Analysis Statement.pdf 03-20 Decomissioning Plan.pdf 03-20 Viewshed Analysis.pdf 03-20 Visual Simulation.pdf 03-20 Exhibit A - Protected Species Review.pdf 03-20 Exhibit B - Phase I Environmental Site Assessment.pdf 03-20 Exhibit C - DCR Ltr dated September 22, 2018.pdf 03-20 Exhibit D - Phase I Historical Resources.pdf 03-20 CUP Site Plan.pdf 177 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #03-20 Foxglove Solar, LLC Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: May 22, 2020 Staff Contact: M. Tyler Klein, AICP, Senior Planner This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 06/03/20 Pending Board of Supervisors: 07/08/20 Pending EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to enable construction of a 370-acres utility-scale solar power generating facility (disturbed area) located on property totaling approximately 668.5-acres. Should the Planning Commission find this use for a utility-scale solar power generating facility to be appropriate, Staff would suggest the following Conditions of Approval: 1. All review agency comments provided during the review of this application shall be complied with at all times. 2. An engineered site plan, in accordance with the requirements of Artic le VIII of the Fredrick County Zoning Ordinance, shall be submitted to and subject to approval by Frederick County prior to the establishment of the use. The site plan shall address additional regulations for specific uses outlined in §165-204.26 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and be in general conformance with the Preliminary Site Plans, included with the CUP application, prepared by Timmons Group, dated April 17, 2020. 3. Buffers and screening shall be provided around the perimeter of the project in general conformance with quantity of the proposed plantings depicted on Sheet 5 of the Preliminary Site Plan, “Landscaping/Vegetative Screening Detail,” included with the CUP application, prepared by Timmons Group, dated April 17, 2020. Buffers and screening shall fulfill the landscape screening requirements of §165-203.02(B)(1) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. 4. Prior to site plan approval, the owner shall enter into a written agreement with Frederick County to decommission solar energy equipment, facilities, or devices pursuant to the terms and conditions of §15.2-2241.2(B) of the Code of Virginia. The written agreement shall be updated every five (5) years and in general conformance with the 178 Page 2 CUP #03-20 – Foxglove Solar, LLC May 22, 2020 Decommissioning Plan, included with the CUP application, prepared by Walsh, Colucci, Lubeley & Walsh, revised April 21, 2020. 5. Batteries, for the purposes of mass storage of electricity that will eventually be transferred to the grid, are prohibited as part of this CUP. 6. Any expansion or modification of this land use will require the approval of a new CUP. Following this public hearing, it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to offer a recommendation concerning this application to the Board of Supervisors. Any recommendation for approval should also include a statement affirming that the proposed solar facility is in substantial accord with the Comprehensive Plan. 179 Page 3 CUP #03-20 – Foxglove Solar, LLC May 22, 2020 LOCATION: These properties are generally located south of Marlboro Road (Route 631), east and west of Hites Road (Route 625), north of Klines Mill Road (Route 633), north of Clark Road (Route 638) and south of Vaucluse Road (Route 638). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 84-A-40, 84-A-40A, 84-A-50, 84-A-29, 73-A-21, & 84-A-39 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Agricultural Agricultural and Forestal District (South Frederick) Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural/Residential South: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural/Residential East: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural/Residential/Vacant West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural/Residential PROPOSED USE: This is a request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to enable construction of a 370-acres utility-scale solar power generating facility (disturbed area) located on property totaling approximately 668.5-acres. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation: The application for a Conditional Use Permit for these properties appear to have little measurable impact on Route 631 (Marlboro Road), Route 625 (Hites Road), and the VDOT facilities providing access to the properties. Locations have been identified for a low-volume commercial entrance, on Route 631 and Route 625. The new entrances will need to meet VDOT standards for the proposed use. Should the use ever expand in the future, the entran ces will need to be reviewed to determine if additional improvements may be required. See comment letter dated March 31, 2020. Frederick County Fire Marshal: Plans approved by Fire Marshal, Frederick County. See comment letter dated March 31, 2020. 180 Page 4 CUP #03-20 – Foxglove Solar, LLC May 22, 2020 Frederick County Inspections: The utility scale solar power generating facilities conditional use permit for installation of solar array shall be designed per the 2015 Virginia Building Code, U-Utility Use Group. Solar panel installation not associated with publicly regulated utilities require permits. Plans submitted for permits may require the design to be sealed by a Registered Design Professional licensed in the State of Virginia. Arrays shall be designed for the applicable loads as required in Chapter 16 VBC. Please note the requirements in Chapter 17 of VBC for special inspection requirements on the type of structure (soil, concrete etc.). See comment letter dated March 6, 2020. Frederick County Public Works: A comprehensive review shall be performed at the time of site plan submission. All stormwater and E & S shall be designed in accordance with County Code Chapter 143 and VA DEQ requirements. See comment letter dated March 23, 2020. Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB): The Virginia Department of Historic Resources identified many historic properties in the vicinity; three of which are located on the site: o Miller House (34-0254) o Woodbine Farm (34-5075) o Farmhouse, Route 633 (34-0429) In addition, a portion of the Cedar Creek Battlefield is located south of the properties with a small portion identified on the southernmost property, PIN #84-A-29. After reviewing the information provided, the Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) recommended approval of the CUP with the following comments: • The Applicant should not disturb any structures or ruins that are present on the properties. There are a number of barns, outbuildings, the Miller House ruins, a cemetery, and the overgrown Woodbine Farm main house. These structures should be protected from any disturbance from this project. • No solar structures should be placed on the portion of the property that is located within the limits of the Cedar Creek Battlefield. • A Phase 1 Archeological Survey will be completed as part of the permitting of this project. 181 Page 5 CUP #03-20 – Foxglove Solar, LLC May 22, 2020 This survey should document the collection of historic structures on and around this development and determine if this area would qualify as a rural historic district. See comment letter dated May 22, 2020. Planning and Zoning: Utility-scale solar power generating facilities are a permitted use in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District with an approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The Board of Supervisors added “utility-scale solar power generating facilities” to the Zoning Ordinance on January 8, 2020, including additional regulations for specific uses. These additional regulations further specify for utility-scale solar power generating facilities to prepare an engineered site plan and enter into a written agreement with Frederick County for facility decommissioning. The application proposes use of approximately 668.5-acres of rural area property, primarily used for agriculture, to generate 75 megawatts (MWS) or photovoltaic (solar) electricity. Approximately 370.1-acres of the subject parcels will be utilized for the installation of rows of ground-mounted photovoltaic modules, commonly known as solar panels, other necessary equipment for facility operations, access paths, fencing and landscaping. Most of the application acreage is also within the South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District. Ground disturbed will be replanted with native turf grass that will preserve the soil, prevent erosion, and improve water quality. The solar panels will be interconnected, and the power generated by each solar panel will be combined, converted, and the voltage increased to allow delivery of the power to the adjacent First Energy 138 kilovolt (KV) transmission line. The proximity of the project to the existing transmission line was a significant factor in the selection of these properties for the development of the facility. The application states the electricity generated by capturing sunlight will create quiet, clean, and affordable electricity for Frederick County and elsewhere in Virginia. Additionally, the project as proposed does not include any batteries for the purposes of mass storage of electricity that will eventually be transferred into the grid. The 2035 Comprehensive Plan envisions this area of the County to remain primarily rural in nature and for agricultural land to be preserved for future generations. The project is generally compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, with the rural character of the area, and with the adjoining agricultural and residential uses. The preservation of the underlying land maintains the ability for agricultural uses in the future. As stated in the application, the use is highly passive with limited noise, lighting, and traffic during operations. Setbacks for the solar arrays (panels) will conform to the setback requirements contained in the Zoning Ordinance for principle uses in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District (§165-401.07): 60- feet (FT) front setbacks from right-of-way streets and roads, and side/rear setbacks of 50-FT from adjoining parcels 6-acres or less, and 100-FT from adjoining parcels of more than 6-acres. 182 Page 6 CUP #03-20 – Foxglove Solar, LLC May 22, 2020 The required setbacks are depicted on the Preliminary Site Plans included with the application. The applicant has also proposed buffering and screening around the perimeter of the property to shield view of the facility from adjacent roadways, residences, and existing agritourism operations. A Visual Simulation, included with the application materials, depicts the anticipated screening as viewed from adjacent roadways at various intervals. Finally, a draft Decommissioning Plan included with the application materials, satisfies requirements contained in §165-204.26 of the Zoning Ordinance, ensuring that in the event the facility is no longer in operation, the land will be returned to the pre-development condition with all solar infrastructure removed, ensuring future viability of the land to resume agricultural operations. Further, proposed condition of approval #4 ensures that Frederick County would maintain a bond that is updated every five (5) years keeping it up to date. In addition to requirements contained in the Zoning Ordinance, the applicant is concurrently pursuing a “Permit-by-Rule” (PBR) through the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). The PBR is a state-level administrative review and approval process for the siting of solar energy facilities in the Commonwealth, including environmental and cultural review and study. One component of the state required PBR review is local jurisdiction “approval” of solar project siting; this CUP application, if approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, would satisfy that requirement enabling completion of a PBR process for this project. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 06/03/20 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: This is a request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to enable construction of a 370-acres utility-scale solar power generating facility (disturbed area) located on property totaling approximately 668.5-acres. Should the Planning Commission find this use for a utility-scale solar power generating facility to be appropriate, Staff would suggest the following Conditions of Approval: 1. All review agency comments provided during the review of this application shall be complied with at all times. 2. An engineered site plan, in accordance with the requirements of Article VIII of the Fredrick County Zoning Ordinance, shall be submitted to and subject to approval by Frederick County prior to the establishment of the use. The site plan shall address additional regulations for specific uses outlined in §165-204.26 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and be in general conformance with the Preliminary Site Plans, included with the CUP application, prepared by Timmons Group, dated April 17, 2020. 183 Page 7 CUP #03-20 – Foxglove Solar, LLC May 22, 2020 3. Buffers and screening shall be provided around the perimeter of the project in general conformance with quantity of the proposed plantings depicted on Sheet 5 of the Preliminary Site Plan, “Landscaping/Vegetative Screening Detail,” included with the CUP application, prepared by Timmons Group, dated April 17, 2020. Buffers and screening shall fulfill the landscape screening requirements of §165-203.02(B)(1) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. 4. Prior to site plan approval, the owner shall enter into a written agreement with Frederick County to decommission solar energy equipment, facilities, or devices pursuant to the terms and conditions of §15.2-2241.2(B) of the Code of Virginia. The written agreement shall be updated every five (5) years and in general conformance with the Decommissioning Plan, included with the CUP application, prepared by Walsh, Colucci, Lubeley & Walsh, revised April 21, 2020. 5. Batteries, for the purposes of mass storage of electricity that will eventually be transferred to the grid, are prohibited as part of this CUP. 6. Any expansion or modification of this land use will require the approval of a new CUP. Following this public hearing, it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to offer a recommendation concerning this application to the Board of Supervisors. Any recommendation for approval should also include a statement affirming that the proposed solar facility is in substantial accord with the Comprehensive Plan. 184 84 A 29 84 A 50 84 A 50 84 A 40 84 A 39 84 A 40A 73 A 21 1115CHAPEL RD 151WESTERNVIEW DR 1461HITES RD 621KLINESMILL RD 725KLINESMILL RD 571KLINES MILL RD 520KLINESMILL RD 478KLINESMILL RD 172KLINESMILL RD 245VAUCLUSE RD 6634VALLEY PIKE 241WESTERNVIEW DR 120WESTERNVIEW DR 1341HITES RD 566KLINESMILL RD 325WESTERNVIEW DR 276WESTERNVIEW DR 210WESTERNVIEW DR 1273HITES RD 746KLINESMILL RD 734KLINES MILL RD 211VAUCLUSESPRING 733BUFFALOMARSH RD 190NEWELL DR 411WESTERNVIEW DR 379WESTERNVIEW DR 342WESTERNVIEW DR 1282HITES RD 515VAUCLUSESPRING 180NEWELL DR 443WESTERNVIEW DR 447WESTERNVIEW DR 1196HITES RD 619VAUCLUSE RD 301VAUCLUSE RD 205VAUCLUSE RD 161NEWELL DR160NEWELL DR 260NEWELL DR 284NEWELL DR 451WESTERNVIEW DR 1162HITES RD 320CONESTOGA LN 266VAUCLUSE RD 281NEWELL DR251NEWELL DR 1111HITES RD 388VAUCLUSE RD 360VAUCLUSE RD 528BUFFALOMARSH RD 418BUFFALOMARSH RD 181BUFFALOMARSH RD 1138CLARK RD 1038HITES RD 1053HITES RD 530VAUCLUSE RD 308BUFFALOMARSH RD 245BUFFALOMARSH RD 301BUFFALOMARSH RD 1080CLARK RD 1160CLARK RD 996HITES RD1020HITES RD 370BUFFALOMARSH RD 191BUFFALOMARSH RD 201BUFFALOMARSH RD 986CLARK RD 1181CLARK RD 134STROSNIDER LN 306BUFFALOMARSH RD 862CLARK RD 888HITES RD 700VAUCLUSE RD 696VAUCLUSE RD 698VAUCLUSE RD 365FAMILY DR660CLARK RD 808HITES RD 365CARSON LN 846HITES RD 846STRODEMCLEOD LN 420CLARK RD 420CLARK RD 685CLARK RD 697CLARK RD 716HITES RD 756HITES RD 722HITES RD 685HITES RD704HITES RD 320CLARK RD 514CLARK RD 609CLARK RD 594HITES RD 138GEM DR 197CARSON LN 458HITES RD 564HITES RD 615HITES RD 200CHANTERELLE CT 560HITES RD 1213MARLBORO RD 121CHANTERELLE CT 131CHANTERELLE CT 210CLARK RD 191CLARK RD 190CHANTERELLE CT 160CHANTERELLE CT 1211MARLBORO RD 194CLARK RD 6419MIDDLE RD 127CLARK RD 316HITES RD 298HITES RD 1215MARLBORO RD 969MARLBORO RD 6522MIDDLE RD 105CLARK RD 6363MIDDLE RD 6319MIDDLE RD 131POMME CIR 186HITES RD 182HITES RD 1381MARLBORO RD6342MIDDLE RD 6312MIDDLE RD 1687MARLBORO RD 1631MARLBORO RD 6124MIDDLE RD 6124MIDDLE RD 213TUCKAHOE LN 6286MIDDLE RD 1651MARLBORO RD 1677MARLBORO RD 1541MARLBORO RD 1567MARLBORO RD 239INEZ LN 116CORA LN 1512MARLBORO RD 1009GERMANY RD 1009GERMANY RD 1326MARLBORO RD 242INEZ LN 210INEZ LN 141INEZ LN 598TUCKAHOE LN 5868MIDDLE RD 1736MARLBORO RD 173OAKHILL DR 1344MARLBORO RD 1030LIMEKILN RD 1156MARLBORO RD1158MARLBORO RD142INEZ LN 247OAKHILL DR 1682MARLBORO RD 231OAKHILL DR 241OAKHILL DR 860GERMANY RD 357OVERSEER LN 5600MIDDLE RD 5699MIDDLE RD 5621MIDDLE RD D A R T E R J O D R C O R A L N V A L L E Y P I K E PRESSHOUSEWAY GEM DR P O M M E C I R I N E Z L N CHANTERELLE CT N E W E L L D R C I D E R M I L L W A Y V A U C L U S E S P R I N G L N C A R T E R S L N O A K H I L L D R N I T T A N Y S O U T H W A Y S T R O S N I D E R L N CARSON LN KLINESMILL RD M I D D L E R D G E R M A N Y R D H I T E S R D VAUCLUSE RD WESTERNVIEW DR M A R L B O R O R D CLARK RD T U C K A H O E L N B U F F A L O M A R S H R D Application Parcels EM (Ex tractive Manufacturing District) RP (Residential Per form ance District) Agricultural & Foresta l Districts South Frederick District µ Frederick C ounty Planning & Development107 N Kent StWinchester, V A 22601540 - 665 - 5651Map Created: April 30, 2020 Stephens City H I T E S R D M I D D L E R D CHAPEL RD V A L L E Y P I K E CLARK RD VAUCLUSE RDKLINES MILL RD B U F F A L O M A R S H R D CARSON LN L I B E R T Y L N §¨¦81 0 2,250 4,5001,125 Feet C U P # 0 3 - 2 0 : F o x g l o v e S o l a r , L L CPINs: 7 3 - A - 2 1 , 8 4 - A - 2 9 , 8 4 - A - 3 9 , 8 4 - A - 4 0 , 8 4 - A - 4 0 A , 8 4 - A - 5 0Utility S c a l e S o l a r F a c i li t yZoning M a p CUP #03-20 CUP #03-20 CUP #03-20 CUP #03-20 CUP #03-20 CUP #03-20 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 Foxglove Solar CUP Adjacent Property Owner List {P0990746.DOCX / 1 Foxglove Solar - Adjacent Property Owner List 011121 000001} Identifier # TM Owner/Address 1 84 A 3 Mabel C Rickard Trustee Mabel C Rickard Trust 996 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 2 73 A 31 Woodbine Farms Inc. 510 Barley lane Winchester, VA 22602 3 73 A 30 O Shirley K Anderson 1680 Marlboro Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 4 73 A 30 C Clayton S Carbaugh 1736 Marlboro Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 5 73 A 20 Charles C Bauserman 5868 Middle Road Winchester, VA 22602 6 73 A 30 D Philip E and Joyce N Newcome 1687 Marlboro Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 7 84 A 40C William L Shomaker 846 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 8 84 A 49G Roy E and Loretta G McDonald Trustees 364 Carson LN Stephens City, VA 22655 9 84 A 42A Wade Ramey 808 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 10 84 A 49B Roy E and Loretta G McDonald Trustees 364 Carson LN Stephens City, VA 22655 11 84 A 46 Kahn LLC 117 Clark Road Stephens City, VA 22655 12 84 1 3 Bradley S and Brenda S Fincham 1077 Hites Rd Middletown, VA 22645 13 84 1 4 Kevin T Kelley 1087 Hites Rd Middletown, VA 22645 14 84 1 5 Arvella M Sears 109 Oak Side Lane Winchester, VA 22603 217 Foxglove Solar CUP Adjacent Property Owner List {P0990746.DOCX / 1 Foxglove Solar - Adjacent Property Owner List 011121 000001} 15 84 A 44 Ridings L Vernon Residual Trust 1028 Germany Road Stephens City, 22655 16 84 A 49 Tilden E and Nancy A Strosnider 722 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 17 84 A 41 Donald R and Stella M Redmiles Trustees 3302 Royale Glen Ave Davidsonville, MD 21035 18 84 A 42 Tilden E and Nancy A Strosnider 722 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 19 84 A 42D Tilden E and Nancy A Strosnider 722 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 20 84 A 42B David M and Gladys J Manuel 782 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 21 84 A 42C Wayne C Hoover 836 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 22 84 A 4 Michael Marquis Kelly Marquis 986 Clark Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 23 84 A 40B Charles S and Lisa S Higgs 888 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 24 84 A 34D Robert Kim Creighton Patricia An Creighton 1080 Clark Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 25 84 A 38A Terry L Taylor 1127 Clark Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 26 84 A 38 Karl D and Brenda L Germain 1181 Clark Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 27 84 A 51 Paul W. Britner and Karen E Nelson 530 Vaucluse Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 28 84 A 34C Scott D Tierney Stephanie A Tierney 1138 Clark Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 29 84 A 53 David S and Susie Linscomb 218 Foxglove Solar CUP Adjacent Property Owner List {P0990746.DOCX / 1 Foxglove Solar - Adjacent Property Owner List 011121 000001} 432 Spring Valley Dr Winchester, VA 22603 30 84 A 37 Larry E Rickard Sr Trustee and Rebecca H Rickard Trustee 996 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 31 84 A 34 Gary Wayne McDonald 514 Clark Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 32 84 A 36 Eugene F and Mary J Snow 1020 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 33 84 A 34B James M and Susan K Brown 1038 Hites Rd Middletown, VA 22645 34 84 A 35 Dolores Inlow and Vick L Wisecarver 1053 Hites Rd Middletown, VA 22645 35 84 A 27 Rex Cornelius Campbell Trustee Mary Miller Campbell Trustee 725 Klines Mill Rd Middletown, VA 22645 36 84 A 27C Stephen E and Annette K Evans 621 Klines Mill Rd Middletown, VA 22645 37 84 1 1 Gerald L and Vickie L Wisecarver 1053 Hites Rd Middletown, VA 22645 38 84 3 2 Jeffrey Dale Rose and Julia Harkrader Rose PO Box 1178 Stephens City, VA 22655 39 84 A 33 Wanda L Hibbs 1111 Hites Rd Middletown, VA 22645 40 84 A 32 Dennis S and Rebecca L Manuel 1162 Hites Rd Middletown, VA 22645 41 84 A 31 Stephen Schuurman and Amanda E Compton 1196 Hites Rd Middletown, VA 22645 42 84 5 1 Lillian A Brown 1213 Hites Rd Middletown, VA 22645 43 84 A 28A Charles A and Robin J Bentley 566 Klines Mill Rd Middletown, VA 22645 219 Foxglove Solar CUP Adjacent Property Owner List {P0990746.DOCX / 1 Foxglove Solar - Adjacent Property Owner List 011121 000001} 44 84 5 4 Larry Lee Hinton Sr 746 Klines Mill Rd Middletown, VA 22645 45 84 5 5 Gene A Jenkin Jr 734 Klines Mill Rd Middletown, VA 22645 46 84 A 27F Mark A. Hollis HeidiL. Hollis 12627 Oxon Rd Oak Hill, VA 20171 47 84 A 1 Albert A McDonald Trust 609 Clark Road Stephens City, VA 22655 48 73 A 30 N Troy J and Patricia D Campbell 1631 Marlboro Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 49 84 8 2 22 Mountain Vista LLC 3042 Valley Ave Ste 101 Winchester, VA 22601 50 84 8 2 21 Mountain Vista LLC 3042 Valley Ave Ste 101 Winchester, VA 22601 51 84 8 2 20 Mountain Vista LLC 3042 Valley Ave Ste 101 Winchester, VA 22601 52 84 8 2 19 Jason and Jennifer J Robinson 160 Chanterelle Ct Stephens City, VA 22655 53 84 8 2 15 Charles A and Laura S Ridgeway 156 Blackford Drive Stephenson, VA 22656 54 84 8 2 14 Mountain Vista LLC 3042 Valley Ave Ste 101 Winchester, VA 22601 55 84 8 2 13 Billy M and Billie P Young 182 Hites Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 56 84 A 49E Jason A and Jennifer A McDonald 388 Vaucluse Rd Stephens City, VA 22655 220 Foxglove Solar CUP Adjacent Property Owner List {P0990746.DOCX / 1 Foxglove Solar - Adjacent Property Owner List 011121 000001} 57 84 A 2 Constance M. Meagher 12265 River Road Richmond, VA 23238 221 Y:\852\840\41147 - Foxg love_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-AP O.mxd 2 3 ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ^_ ^_ ^_ HITES VIEWESTATES S t r o s n i d e r L n ( 2 5 M P H ) Klines M i l l R d ( 2 5 M P H ) MarlboroRd(55MPH) ClarkRd(25MPH) Hites R d ( 2 5 M P H ) AbigailWay C o r a L n New e l l D r Valle y P i k e I n e z L n Gem D r Middle R d NewellDr C i d e r M i ll W a y O a k H i l l D r Ge r m a n y R d Vaucl u s e S p r i n g L n N i t t a n y South W a y Buff a l o M a r s h R d Vauclus e R d Cone s t o g a L n CarsonLn Tuck a h o e L n WesternviewDr 50' 50' 50' 50' 50' 60' 60' 60' 60 ' 60' 60' 60' 100' 100 ' 100 ' 100' 100' 100' 100 ' 100' 200' 200' 200' 200' 200' 1 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2728 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 3738 3940 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 47 48 49 50 51 52 5354 55 57 56 Sheet 2 Sheet 3 Legend P roject Limits - 668.5 Acres ^_P roject Entrance Setbacks - 60' / 100' / 200' D D D Fence Ag ricultural and Forest District Frederick County Tax P arcels Adjacent Parcels Zone - R ural Area (R A) DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE1 of 3 DATE 02/12/2020 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME L. W HEELER FOX GLOV E SOLAR 1 " = 700 'H: ADJACENTP R OP ER TYOW NER MAP REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCR IP TION These exhibits and associated documents arethe exclusive property of TIMMONS GR OU Pand may not be reproduced in w hole or in partand shall not be used for any purposew hatsoever, inclusive, but not limited toconstruction, bidding , and/or constructionstaking w ithout the express w ritten consent of PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R P R O J E C T FO X G L O V E S O L A R , L L C FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE06801,360 SCALE (FEET) FOX GLOV E SOLAR , LLC337 LOG CANOE CIR CLESTEV ENSV ILLE, MD 21666(410) 604-3603 NOTES:1.P R OJECT AR EA IS AP P R OX IMATE.2.SETBACK LINES AR E 60 FEET FR OM ADJACENT R IGHT OF W AYS, 100FEET FR OM ADJACENT P R OP ER TY OW NER S, AND 200 FEET FR OMADJACENT AGR ICU LTU R AL AND FOR EST DISTR ICT P AR CELS GR EATERTHAN 6 ACR ES.3.P R IMAR Y ZONING DISTR ICT AND U SE OF EACH P AR CEL COMP R ISINGP R OJECT AR EA IS R A.4.ALL P AR CELS AR E LOCATED IN THE BACK CR EEK MAGISTER IALDISTR ICT.5.TOTAL LAND AR EA OF SU BJECT P R OP ER TY IS 668.5 ACR ES.6.TOTAL P R OP OSED LAND AR EA TO BE DEV ELOP ED IS 370.1 ACR ES. IDENTIFIER PIN OWNER NAME ZONE GIS ACREAGE USE 1 84 A 3 R ICK AR D MABEL C TR U STEE R A 43.3 DW ELLING2 73 A 31 W OODBINE FAR MS INC R A 84.1 V ACANT3 73 A 30O ANDER SON SHIR LEY K R A 51.2 DW ELLING4 73 A 30C CAR BAU GH CLAYTON S R A 2.1 DW ELLING5 73 A 20 BAU SER MAN CHAR LES C R A 238.8 V ACANT 6 73 A 30D NEW COME P HILIP E R A 17.7 V INEYAR D/ W INER Y7 84 A 40C SHOMAK ER W ILLIAM L R A 9.6 DW ELLING 8 84 A 49G MCDONALD R OY E & LOR ETTA G R A 5.2 V ACANT 9 84 A 42A R AMEY W ADE R A 6.5 DW ELLING10 84 A 49B MCDONALD R OY E R A 10.3 V ACANT11 84 A 46 K AHN LLC R A 60.3 DW ELLING12 84 1 3 FINCHAM BR ADLEY S R A 0.7 DW ELLING13 84 1 4 K ELLEY K EV IN T R A 0.6 DW ELLING14 84 1 5 SEAR S AR V ELLA M R A 0.7 DW ELLING 15 84 A 44 R IDINGS L V ER NON R ESIDU AL TR U ST R A 50.3 DW ELLING 16 84 A 49 STR OSNIDER TILDEN E JR R A 162.0 V ACANT17 84 A 41 R EDMILES DONALD R R A 6.1 DW ELLING18 84 A 42 STR OSNIDER TILDEN E JR R A 9.9 V ACANT19 84 A 42D STR OSNIDER TILDEN E JR R A 1.7 V ACANT20 84 A 42B MANU EL DAV ID M R A 1.5 DW ELLING21 84 A 42C HOOV ER W AYNE C R A 1.7 DW ELLING22 84 A 4 MAR Q U IS MICHAEL R A 21.7 DW ELLING23 84 A 40B HIGGS CHAR LES S JR R A 5.6 DW ELLING24 84 A 34D CR EIGHTON R OBER T K IM R A 7.0 DW ELLING25 84 A 38A TAYLOR TER R Y L R A 4.5 DW ELLING26 84 A 38 GER MAIN K AR L D R A 5.2 DW ELLING27 84 A 51 BR ITNER P AU L W R A 26.5 DW ELLING28 84 A 34C TIER NEY SCOTT D R A 13.6 DW ELLING29 84 A 53 LINSCOMB DAV ID S R A 81.0 V ACANT 30 84 A 37 R ICK AR D LAR R Y E SR TR U STEE R A 1.2 DW ELLING 31 84 A 34 MCDONALD GAR Y W AYNE R A 57.1 V ACANT32 84 A 36 SNOW EU GENE F R A 1.2 DW ELLING33 84 A 34B BR OW N JAMES M & SU SAN K R A 8.2 DW ELLING34 84 A 35 INLOW DOLOR ES R A 0.4 DW ELLING35 84 A 27 CAMP BELL R EX C R A 10.1 DW ELLING36 84 A 27C EV ANS STEP HEN E R A 46.0 DW ELLING37 84 1 1 W ISECAR V ER GER ALD L R A 0.9 DW ELLING38 84 3 2 R OSEDALE JEFFR EY R A 1.2 DW ELLING39 84 A 33 HIBBS W ANDA L R A 1.1 DW ELLING40 84 A 32 MANU EL DENNIS S JR R A 1.2 DW ELLING41 84 A 31 SCHU U R MAN STEP HEN R A 7.8 DW ELLING42 84 5 1 BR OW N LILLIAN A R A 5.3 DW ELLING43 84 A 28A BENTLEY CHAR LES A R A 34.2 DW ELLING44 84 5 4 HINTON LAR R Y LEE SR R A 5.0 DW ELLING45 84 5 5 JENK INS GENE A JR R A 5.8 DW ELLING46 84 A 27F HOLLIS MAR K A R A 5.0 DW ELLING47 84 A 1 MCDONALD ALBER T A TR U ST R A 207.6 DW ELLING48 73 A 30N CAMP ELL TR OY J R A 5.5 DW ELLING49 84 8 2 22 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.0 V ACANT50 84 8 2 21 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.0 V ACANT51 84 8 2 20 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.1 V ACANT52 84 8 2 19 R OBINSON JASON R A 2.9 V ACANT53 84 8 2 15 R IDEW AY CHAR LES A R A 2.6 V ACANT54 84 8 2 14 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.5 V ACANT55 84 8 2 13 YOU NG BILLY M R A 5.4 V ACANT 56 84 A 49E MCDONALD JASON A R A 5.2 DW ELLING/ MOBILE HOME57 84 A 2 MEAGHER CONSTANCE R A 66.5 DW ELLING 222 Y:\852\840\41147 - Foxg love_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-AP O.mxd 2 3 ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ^_ HITES VIEWESTATES ClarkRd(25MPH) M a r l boro Rd(55MPH) H i t e s R d (2 5 M P H ) M i d d l e R d Gem D r O a k H i l l D r Ge r m a n y R d Carso n L n Tucka h o e L n 50' 50' 60' 100' 100 ' 100' 100 ' 200' 200' 200' 200' 2 34 5 6 7 89 10 11 15 16 17 18 18 19 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 57 Legend P roject Limits - 668.5 Acres ^_P roject Entrance Setbacks - 60' / 100' / 200' D D D Fence Ag ricultural and Forest District Frederick County Tax P arcels Adjacent Parcels Zone - R ural Area (R A) DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE2 of 3 DATE 02/12/2020 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME L. W HEELER FOX GLOV E SOLAR 1 " = 350 'H: ADJACENTP R OP ER TYOW NER MAP REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCR IP TION These exhibits and associated documents arethe exclusive property of TIMMONS GR OU Pand may not be reproduced in w hole or in partand shall not be used for any purposew hatsoever, inclusive, but not limited toconstruction, bidding , and/or constructionstaking w ithout the express w ritten consent of PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R P R O J E C T FO X G L O V E S O L A R , L L C FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE0350700 SCALE (FEET) FOX GLOV E SOLAR , LLC337 LOG CANOE CIR CLESTEV ENSV ILLE, MD 21666(410) 604-3603 NOTES:1.P R OJECT AR EA IS AP P R OX IMATE.2.SETBACK LINES AR E 60 FEET FR OM ADJACENT R IGHT OF W AYS, 100FEET FR OM ADJACENT P R OP ER TY OW NER S, AND 200 FEET FR OMADJACENT AGR ICU LTU R AL AND FOR EST DISTR ICT P AR CELS GR EATERTHAN 6 ACR ES.3.P R IMAR Y ZONING DISTR ICT AND U SE OF EACH P AR CEL COMP R ISINGP R OJECT AR EA IS R A.4.ALL P AR CELS AR E LOCATED IN THE BACK CR EEK MAGISTER IALDISTR ICT.5.TOTAL LAND AR EA OF SU BJECT P R OP ER TY IS 668.5 ACR ES.6.TOTAL P R OP OSED LAND AR EA TO BE DEV ELOP ED IS 370.1 ACR ES. IDENTIFIER PIN OWNER NAME ZONE GIS ACREAGE USE 1 84 A 3 R ICK AR D MABEL C TR U STEE R A 43.3 DW ELLING2 73 A 31 W OODBINE FAR MS INC R A 84.1 V ACANT3 73 A 30O ANDER SON SHIR LEY K R A 51.2 DW ELLING4 73 A 30C CAR BAU GH CLAYTON S R A 2.1 DW ELLING5 73 A 20 BAU SER MAN CHAR LES C R A 238.8 V ACANT 6 73 A 30D NEW COME P HILIP E R A 17.7 V INEYAR D/ W INER Y7 84 A 40C SHOMAK ER W ILLIAM L R A 9.6 DW ELLING 8 84 A 49G MCDONALD R OY E & LOR ETTA G R A 5.2 V ACANT 9 84 A 42A R AMEY W ADE R A 6.5 DW ELLING10 84 A 49B MCDONALD R OY E R A 10.3 V ACANT11 84 A 46 K AHN LLC R A 60.3 DW ELLING12 84 1 3 FINCHAM BR ADLEY S R A 0.7 DW ELLING13 84 1 4 K ELLEY K EV IN T R A 0.6 DW ELLING14 84 1 5 SEAR S AR V ELLA M R A 0.7 DW ELLING 15 84 A 44 R IDINGS L V ER NON R ESIDU AL TR U ST R A 50.3 DW ELLING 16 84 A 49 STR OSNIDER TILDEN E JR R A 162.0 V ACANT17 84 A 41 R EDMILES DONALD R R A 6.1 DW ELLING18 84 A 42 STR OSNIDER TILDEN E JR R A 9.9 V ACANT19 84 A 42D STR OSNIDER TILDEN E JR R A 1.7 V ACANT20 84 A 42B MANU EL DAV ID M R A 1.5 DW ELLING21 84 A 42C HOOV ER W AYNE C R A 1.7 DW ELLING22 84 A 4 MAR Q U IS MICHAEL R A 21.7 DW ELLING23 84 A 40B HIGGS CHAR LES S JR R A 5.6 DW ELLING24 84 A 34D CR EIGHTON R OBER T K IM R A 7.0 DW ELLING25 84 A 38A TAYLOR TER R Y L R A 4.5 DW ELLING26 84 A 38 GER MAIN K AR L D R A 5.2 DW ELLING27 84 A 51 BR ITNER P AU L W R A 26.5 DW ELLING28 84 A 34C TIER NEY SCOTT D R A 13.6 DW ELLING29 84 A 53 LINSCOMB DAV ID S R A 81.0 V ACANT 30 84 A 37 R ICK AR D LAR R Y E SR TR U STEE R A 1.2 DW ELLING 31 84 A 34 MCDONALD GAR Y W AYNE R A 57.1 V ACANT32 84 A 36 SNOW EU GENE F R A 1.2 DW ELLING33 84 A 34B BR OW N JAMES M & SU SAN K R A 8.2 DW ELLING34 84 A 35 INLOW DOLOR ES R A 0.4 DW ELLING35 84 A 27 CAMP BELL R EX C R A 10.1 DW ELLING36 84 A 27C EV ANS STEP HEN E R A 46.0 DW ELLING37 84 1 1 W ISECAR V ER GER ALD L R A 0.9 DW ELLING38 84 3 2 R OSEDALE JEFFR EY R A 1.2 DW ELLING39 84 A 33 HIBBS W ANDA L R A 1.1 DW ELLING40 84 A 32 MANU EL DENNIS S JR R A 1.2 DW ELLING41 84 A 31 SCHU U R MAN STEP HEN R A 7.8 DW ELLING42 84 5 1 BR OW N LILLIAN A R A 5.3 DW ELLING43 84 A 28A BENTLEY CHAR LES A R A 34.2 DW ELLING44 84 5 4 HINTON LAR R Y LEE SR R A 5.0 DW ELLING45 84 5 5 JENK INS GENE A JR R A 5.8 DW ELLING46 84 A 27F HOLLIS MAR K A R A 5.0 DW ELLING47 84 A 1 MCDONALD ALBER T A TR U ST R A 207.6 DW ELLING48 73 A 30N CAMP ELL TR OY J R A 5.5 DW ELLING49 84 8 2 22 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.0 V ACANT50 84 8 2 21 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.0 V ACANT51 84 8 2 20 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.1 V ACANT52 84 8 2 19 R OBINSON JASON R A 2.9 V ACANT53 84 8 2 15 R IDEW AY CHAR LES A R A 2.6 V ACANT54 84 8 2 14 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.5 V ACANT55 84 8 2 13 YOU NG BILLY M R A 5.4 V ACANT 56 84 A 49E MCDONALD JASON A R A 5.2 DW ELLING/ MOBILE HOME57 84 A 2 MEAGHER CONSTANCE R A 66.5 DW ELLING 223 Y:\852\840\41147 - Foxg love_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-AP O.mxd 2 3 ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ^_ ^_ S t r o s n i d e r L n (2 5 M P H ) Klines M i l l R d ( 2 5 M P H ) ClarkRd(25MPH) H i t e s R d (2 5 M P H ) VaucluseRd Buffa l o Marsh Rd V a u c l u s e S p r i n g L n West e r n v i e w D r 50' 50' 50' 50' 60' 60' 60' 60 ' 60' 60' 100 ' 100' 100' 100' 200' 200' 1 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2728 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 3738 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 57 56 Legend P roject Limits - 668.5 Acres ^_P roject Entrance Setbacks - 60' / 100' / 200' D D D Fence Ag ricultural and Forest District Frederick County Tax P arcels Adjacent Parcels Zone - R ural Area (R A) DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE3 of 3 DATE 02/12/2020 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME L. W HEELER FOX GLOV E SOLAR 1 " = 350 'H: ADJACENTP R OP ER TYOW NER MAP REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCR IP TION These exhibits and associated documents arethe exclusive property of TIMMONS GR OU Pand may not be reproduced in w hole or in partand shall not be used for any purposew hatsoever, inclusive, but not limited toconstruction, bidding , and/or constructionstaking w ithout the express w ritten consent of PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R P R O J E C T FO X G L O V E S O L A R , L L C FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE0350700 SCALE (FEET) FOX GLOV E SOLAR , LLC337 LOG CANOE CIR CLESTEV ENSV ILLE, MD 21666(410) 604-3603 NOTES:1.P R OJECT AR EA IS AP P R OX IMATE.2.SETBACK LINES AR E 60 FEET FR OM ADJACENT R IGHT OF W AYS, 100FEET FR OM ADJACENT P R OP ER TY OW NER S, AND 200 FEET FR OMADJACENT AGR ICU LTU R AL AND FOR EST DISTR ICT P AR CELS GR EATERTHAN 6 ACR ES.3.P R IMAR Y ZONING DISTR ICT AND U SE OF EACH P AR CEL COMP R ISINGP R OJECT AR EA IS R A.4.ALL P AR CELS AR E LOCATED IN THE BACK CR EEK MAGISTER IALDISTR ICT.5.TOTAL LAND AR EA OF SU BJECT P R OP ER TY IS 668.5 ACR ES.6.TOTAL P R OP OSED LAND AR EA TO BE DEV ELOP ED IS 370.1 ACR ES. IDENTIFIER PIN OWNER NAME ZONE GIS ACREAGE USE 1 84 A 3 R ICK AR D MABEL C TR U STEE R A 43.3 DW ELLING2 73 A 31 W OODBINE FAR MS INC R A 84.1 V ACANT3 73 A 30O ANDER SON SHIR LEY K R A 51.2 DW ELLING4 73 A 30C CAR BAU GH CLAYTON S R A 2.1 DW ELLING5 73 A 20 BAU SER MAN CHAR LES C R A 238.8 V ACANT 6 73 A 30D NEW COME P HILIP E R A 17.7 V INEYAR D/ W INER Y7 84 A 40C SHOMAK ER W ILLIAM L R A 9.6 DW ELLING 8 84 A 49G MCDONALD R OY E & LOR ETTA G R A 5.2 V ACANT 9 84 A 42A R AMEY W ADE R A 6.5 DW ELLING10 84 A 49B MCDONALD R OY E R A 10.3 V ACANT11 84 A 46 K AHN LLC R A 60.3 DW ELLING12 84 1 3 FINCHAM BR ADLEY S R A 0.7 DW ELLING13 84 1 4 K ELLEY K EV IN T R A 0.6 DW ELLING14 84 1 5 SEAR S AR V ELLA M R A 0.7 DW ELLING 15 84 A 44 R IDINGS L V ER NON R ESIDU AL TR U ST R A 50.3 DW ELLING 16 84 A 49 STR OSNIDER TILDEN E JR R A 162.0 V ACANT17 84 A 41 R EDMILES DONALD R R A 6.1 DW ELLING18 84 A 42 STR OSNIDER TILDEN E JR R A 9.9 V ACANT19 84 A 42D STR OSNIDER TILDEN E JR R A 1.7 V ACANT20 84 A 42B MANU EL DAV ID M R A 1.5 DW ELLING21 84 A 42C HOOV ER W AYNE C R A 1.7 DW ELLING22 84 A 4 MAR Q U IS MICHAEL R A 21.7 DW ELLING23 84 A 40B HIGGS CHAR LES S JR R A 5.6 DW ELLING24 84 A 34D CR EIGHTON R OBER T K IM R A 7.0 DW ELLING25 84 A 38A TAYLOR TER R Y L R A 4.5 DW ELLING26 84 A 38 GER MAIN K AR L D R A 5.2 DW ELLING27 84 A 51 BR ITNER P AU L W R A 26.5 DW ELLING28 84 A 34C TIER NEY SCOTT D R A 13.6 DW ELLING29 84 A 53 LINSCOMB DAV ID S R A 81.0 V ACANT 30 84 A 37 R ICK AR D LAR R Y E SR TR U STEE R A 1.2 DW ELLING 31 84 A 34 MCDONALD GAR Y W AYNE R A 57.1 V ACANT32 84 A 36 SNOW EU GENE F R A 1.2 DW ELLING33 84 A 34B BR OW N JAMES M & SU SAN K R A 8.2 DW ELLING34 84 A 35 INLOW DOLOR ES R A 0.4 DW ELLING35 84 A 27 CAMP BELL R EX C R A 10.1 DW ELLING36 84 A 27C EV ANS STEP HEN E R A 46.0 DW ELLING37 84 1 1 W ISECAR V ER GER ALD L R A 0.9 DW ELLING38 84 3 2 R OSEDALE JEFFR EY R A 1.2 DW ELLING39 84 A 33 HIBBS W ANDA L R A 1.1 DW ELLING40 84 A 32 MANU EL DENNIS S JR R A 1.2 DW ELLING41 84 A 31 SCHU U R MAN STEP HEN R A 7.8 DW ELLING42 84 5 1 BR OW N LILLIAN A R A 5.3 DW ELLING43 84 A 28A BENTLEY CHAR LES A R A 34.2 DW ELLING44 84 5 4 HINTON LAR R Y LEE SR R A 5.0 DW ELLING45 84 5 5 JENK INS GENE A JR R A 5.8 DW ELLING46 84 A 27F HOLLIS MAR K A R A 5.0 DW ELLING47 84 A 1 MCDONALD ALBER T A TR U ST R A 207.6 DW ELLING48 73 A 30N CAMP ELL TR OY J R A 5.5 DW ELLING49 84 8 2 22 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.0 V ACANT50 84 8 2 21 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.0 V ACANT51 84 8 2 20 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.1 V ACANT52 84 8 2 19 R OBINSON JASON R A 2.9 V ACANT53 84 8 2 15 R IDEW AY CHAR LES A R A 2.6 V ACANT54 84 8 2 14 MOU NTAIN V ISTA LLC R A 2.5 V ACANT55 84 8 2 13 YOU NG BILLY M R A 5.4 V ACANT 56 84 A 49E MCDONALD JASON A R A 5.2 DW ELLING/ MOBILE HOME57 84 A 2 MEAGHER CONSTANCE R A 66.5 DW ELLING 224 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT FOXGLOVE SOLAR, LLC March 4, 2020 1 A. Suitability of the Site. 1. Foxglove Solar, LLC, has examined numerous properties in Frederick County as potential sites for a utility scale solar facility. As can be imagined it is difficult to find sites that possess the essential characteristics required for such a facility, including proximity to transmission lines, suitable topography, access, and, perhaps above all, the ability to aggregate sufficient land to make the development of such a project financially feasible. The parcels that have been selected as a site for this project meet the requirements imposed by nature and by practical necessity. The land proposed for this development is comprised of six parcels bearing PIN #s: a portion of 73 A 21, 84 A 40, 84-A-40A, 84 A 50, 84 A 29, and 84 A 39 1. These are properties owned by Woodbine Farms, Inc., Alfred L. and Betty Snapp, Alfred L. Snapp & Son, Inc. and Levi J. and Keighley C. Gore. The total area of these properties is 668.5 acres, and the total proposed land area to be developed as a utility scale solar facility is approximately 370.1 acres, (the “Project”). The Project is graphically depicted on the Preliminary Site Plan prepared by The Timmons Group and dated January 2, 2020. The Project will consist of rows of ground-mounted photovoltaic modules, commonly known as solar panels, to generate 75 MW of clean, quiet, affordable electricity for consumers in the County and elsewhere in Virginia. It will provide power when consumers need it the most, and without using any pipelines, fuel, or water, and without any air pollution, water pollution, or waste. A majority of the ground within the fence lines of the Project will contain no equipment at all, and virtually all of the ground will be planted with native turf grass that will preserve the soil, prevent erosion, and improve water quality. The solar panels will be connected by cables, and the power generated by each solar panel will be combined, converted from direct current (“DC”) to alternating current (“AC”), and its voltage increased to equal that of the First Energy 138 kilovolt Transmission Line to which it will be delivered to the grid by means of a project substation and new utility switch yard situated immediately adjacent to the existing Transmission Line on site. The Project will include solar panels, racking for the panels, inverters that convert DC to AC, collection lines, a project substation that gathers electricity from the inverters and increases its voltage to transmission line intensity. There are also the necessary access paths, pyranometers for measuring solar energy and other meteorological conditions, fencing, and landscaping. 1 This parcel is included in the Project solely because a connecting line from the northern fields must be run to those on the south side of Hites Road. No other facilities, panels, or component of the Project will be placed on that parcel. 225 2 The Project does not use any batteries for the mass storage of electricity that will eventually be transferred into the grid. The panel tracker systems have small batteries that allow them to turn back to the East after the sun has gone down or to turn to horizontal when there are high-wind conditions. The Project fits with the rural character of the area. It is a highly passive use, with no odor/emissions, very limited noise, lighting,2 and traffic. The solar panels will rotate with the sun, have a low visual profile (approximately 12 feet high for a brief period as they track), and will repeat this tracking in operation daily. They will be monitored remotely at an off-site facility, permitting them to be adjusted safely, for example, in high wind or hail conditions to a horizontal stow position, and workers will visit different areas of the Project only on an as-needed basis to perform maintenance and repairs and maintain vegetation. The perimeter of the Project will include setbacks from other uses. Existing vegetation will be retained within such setbacks and if additional screening is necessary landscaping will be added along public roads and where there are adjacent residences within close proximity to the Project. 2. The properties are comprised of extensive areas of mollisols in the northern portions of the Project area, with some areas of alfisols, changing principally to alfisols on the southern portions. Additional detailed soils information can be found in the Circa~ report identified below with respect to cultural and historical resources, at pages 2-10. Approximately the one-half of the northern Woodbine Farms parcel (98.5 acres) that is within the Project area is wooded. The Snapp Inc. property is cleared, as is the majority of the Woodbine Farms land across Hites Road, which is primarily in active cultivation south of Vaucluse Road. All of the parcels except 84 A 29 and 8 A 39 are located in the South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District. The Project is located immediately south of the First Energy Transmission Line crossing the Woodbine Farms property, Parcel 73 A 21. As noted, this is a critical consideration for the location of utility scale solar facilities. There is no 100 year floodplain located within the fence line of the proposed Project, though there is some identifiable at the far western edge of the northern Woodbine parcel, and no subsoil conditions have been identified that would make the installation of solar panels, or the construction of a substation, problematic. There are small areas (approximately 5.1 acres) of potentially jurisdictional wetlands, but those areas would not be disturbed as part of the Project. The areas of steep slopes (greater than 15%) are shown on the Preliminary Site Plan and comprise approximately 56.5 acres. The properties are generally flat to slightly rolling with a typical maximum elevation of 800 to 825 feet, and a lower elevation of 775 feet. 2 Such lighting as is required will be downward facing cutoff fixtures. The principal source of lighting at the Project will be that associated with the existing substation. 226 3 3. There are no site constraints that would preclude the use of the property for a utility scale solar facility. Potentially adverse impacts will be identified during the local and state permitting processes and mitigation will be worked into the Project. Attached to the application in this case are the following detailed documents that provide significant information as to the site and its potential for use as a solar facility. These include a Protected Species Review dated August 2018, prepared by the Timmons Group and incorporated herein as Exhibit A; a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, dated August 28, 2018, prepared by the Timmons Group and incorporated herein as Exhibit B; and a site review by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation for Project 41147, dated September 22, 2018, incorporated herein as Exhibit C. The Project as proposed is defined by the Commonwealth as a “small solar energy project” (9VAC15-60-10) subject to a Permit by Rule (“PBR”) administered by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. Among many other technical requirements, in order to proceed under the PBR an applicant must “furnish[] to the department a certification by the governing body of the locality wherein the … project will be located that the project complies with all applicable land use ordinances[.]” 9 VAC15-60-30(A)(2) 4. Once the Project has lived its useful commercial life, the land used can be returned to cultivation.3 As required by law the Applicant will commit to a decommissioning plan for removal of the equipment both above and below ground, and return of the land to substantially its original condition. The decommissioning plan will provide for security that runs to the benefit of the County as required by state statute. B. Comprehensive Plan Conformity. The County’s Comprehensive Plan does not address renewable energy, or public utility services and facilities. It has been assumed, however, that public utilities are essential wherever they are required and that they are therefore consistent with the Comprehensive Plan without individualized review. The Plan does recognize that the County supports environmentally conscious policies and their relationship to economic development: Frederick County supports green initiatives in the field of economic development. Viable development initiatives should be recognized and their implementation encouraged. Such an example is rail access and transportation which will become more valuable and expected in industrial settings due to desire to operate effectively and efficiently. Frederick County should be proactive in ensuring the resources necessary for business development are planned for in a viable way and available to support identified office and industrial users. With regards to water, wastewater treatment, and electricity, manufacturers will require adequate supply and availability, but will also be interested in 3 The County’s Comprehensive Plan says that “[o]nce land is converted from agricultural use it is unlikely that it will ever be reclaimed.” FCCP, p. 33. This is not true for a solar facility because of the decommissioning requirement. 227 4 quality and service reliability. There is a finite capacity of these resources that must be managed accordingly. Frederick County 2035 Comprehensive Plan (“FCCP”), p. 33. This statement reflects the County’s interest in both “green initiatives” and enhancements in the electrical grid. In this, the County joins some of the largest corporations in the United States, if not the world. By 2018, Apple had become 100% reliant on renewable power, principally solar, for all of its direct operations, with commitments from many of its suppliers to do the same. Moreover, it has adopted a policy of “additionality,” which means that rather than using its vast cash resources simply to buy up the existing sources of green energy, it has a preference for sponsoring the creation of new renewable power sources, since it wishes to put new, clean power on the grid so that is not using up all the clean energy that may be available in the market. A group of companies including Walmart, General Motors, Google, and Johnson & Johnson have formed the Renewable Energy Buyers Alliance to represent firms that purchase renewable energy and remove barriers that make it harder to shift away from carbon based fuels.4 The area for which this application is made is largely rural and has been in agricultural use for many years. The area to be used for the solar panels would be used to harvest a different crop, electrons from the sun. The Applicant recognizes that this is not agriculture as it is customarily understood, but it is the landowner’s choice to remove their lands from customary agricultural uses voluntarily, so that they may generate income from this different kind of “crop.” It is also true that agriculture is a significant element of both the present and future of Frederick County, and is addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. Thus, Frederick County agriculture will evolve in a way that is likely to be more intensive and by necessity more diverse. While this will require less acreage than traditional farming activities, activities it is expected that income from agricultural operations will increase. As such the County should focus on implementing policies that seek to prioritize the protection of these rural areas as well as streamline the process for approving the diversified land uses as described within this section. The rural economy of Frederick County plays a significant role in the life and livelihood of its inhabitants. In addition to providing food products for the region, agriculture is a revenue generator which requires very few local services. Agriculture contributes to Frederick County’s extraordinary 4 It is not just companies. Iceland is powered 100% by renewable energy, Norway has achieved 98.5% sustainability, and Costa Rica 99%. 228 5 viewshed 5 while providing a living to its farmers, citizens, and a place of enjoyment for its visitors. Most importantly, an active, profitable agriculture operation reduces the amount of land converted to more dense uses. Diversification of land use for the agricultural not only generate notable income and drive more tourism dollars to the County, it can also offer future protection the land from conversion to residential uses. The Applicant submits that the use of agricultural land for solar energy production is not inconsistent with other agricultural uses of the property, and that its use for such purposes recognizes the increasingly intensive and diverse agricultural changes that the County has recognized in its Comprehensive Plan. C. Agricultural and Forestal District Considerations. Portions of the properties in the Project are in the South Frederick Ag and Forestal District. Unless a way is found to recognize solar facilities as compatible with these District designations, the properties may be removed from it. The property owner may simply advise the County in writing of his or her intention to withdraw if it is done within the 2020 timeframe allowed. Land Use Valuation, which is actually a separate program under separate legal authority, remains in place until there is a non-qualifying change in use of the property. D. Surrounding Properties. The surrounding properties consist of large tracts of land in excess of 200 acres, down to single family homes on two acre lots in Hites View Estates. The distance to individual properties can be measured from most adjacent Project parcels but most are set off from the areas proposed for solar. With appropriate screening these property owners will have a very limited view of the solar panels once installed. After the Project is constructed, the residents of the area will hear virtually nothing, and see very little. Typical sections of landscaping can be installed where mitigation is needed, as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan. For example, modern solar panels do not produce glare. The FAA has said that solar panels may be more compatible even for airports than other solar energy generation technologies because, among several factors, a solar panel is designed to absorb sunlight (rather than reflect it), minimizing potential impacts of glare as seen from above.6 The glass used for solar panels has less reflectivity than water or window glass, and typical solar panels reflect only about 2 percent 5 The Applicant has produced a series of viewshed studies with its application that demonstrates the visibility of the solar fields from surrounding properties. 6 FAA, “Technical Guidance for Evaluating Selected Solar Technologies on Airports” (November 2010), p. 8. 229 6 of incoming sunlight.7 The Virginia DEQ recommends that counties not address glare from solar projects in their local codes because “significant glare appears unlikely with the PV technology that can be utilized in Virginia . . . .”8 E. Traffic. Construction of the facility is expected to take from four to six months, except the Switching Station, of about five acres in the back of the facility, which may take nine months. The Applicant will control and mitigate any potential traffic inconvenience by implementing a comprehensive traffic control management plan, to be approved by the County. Any typical noise associated with the construction phase of the Project will be mitigated by the construction management plan mentioned above. Once construction is complete, there is essentially no traffic generated from operations. F. Sewage conveyance and treatment. There is no sewage produced from operation of a solar facility. G. Water Supply. A solar facility does not require a water supply. As a practical matter, solar panels are adequately cleaned by rainwater in this geographical region in the US. H. Drainage. An exhibit depicting the drainage flows is included with the Preliminary Site Plan. As part of the formal site plan review process, detailed preliminary erosion and sediment (E&S) control and stormwater management (SWM) plans will be prepared that identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) required to minimize the discharge of sediment into surface water bodies and sensitive areas of the Property (wetlands/streams/floodplains), meeting all required rules and regulations set forth by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). I. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities. There is virtually no solid waste produced from operation of a solar facility. J. Historic Sites and Structures. 7 Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources, et. al “Questions and Answers: Ground- mounted Solar Photovoltaic Systems” (June 2015), p. 22. 8 DEQ, “Model Ordinance for Smaller-Scale Solar Energy Projects in Virginia (By Right Permitting),” (December 21, 2012), p. 5. 230 7 The Applicant commissioned and has provided an Assessment and Probability Analysis for Foxglove Solar, dated August 15, 2018, to provide information on the current condition of the Project area. During the PBR process will, the Virginia Department of Historic Resources will review that Assessment and require mitigation for adverse effects to historic resources. The full study is attached to this Statement as Exhibit D. An archival search was performed to identify any previously-recorded historic and cultural resources within the Project area. This search identified no archaeological resources within the Project area boundaries. The findings indicated there were five potential architectural related areas, two of these sites are potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (“NRHP”). These two sites are summarized below: • Site 034-0303, Cedar Creek Battlefield Study Area: In March 2009, VDHR determined this site potentially eligible for listing on the NRHP. In September 2009, the American Battlefield Protection Program (“ABPP”) released its update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (“CWSAC”) report on the nation’s Civil War battlefields. According to this update, the southernmost end of the Project area falls partially within the extreme northeastern portion of the Study Area for the Cedar Creek Battlefield. As it has for other battlefield sites, the Applicant will work with BVDHR to investigate this area further during the PBR process and mitigate permanent adverse effects. • Site 034-5075, Circa 1880 House and Barn: This house is a frame, vernacular dwelling standing on a continuous-stone foundation and is covered with aluminum siding. Secondary structures on the site include a barn, shed, and equipment shed, with the barn as the primary resource. The solar facility will not require removal of these structures and will not impact them. The Applicant plans to meet with the County’s Historic Resources Advisory Board as part of the review process. K. Impact on Community Facilities: Education The Project will have no adverse impact on education, but can have a most positive one. In addition to revenues produced from the Project, field trips from the County’s schools can be provided that will offer students and teachers an invaluable opportunity to see a material element of that future as it is in operation. Police Protection This is typically required, if at all, during the construction phase. Fire and Rescue Protection 231 8 Solar facilities are inherently safe, because they are a passive use. It is the Applicant’s practice to work with first responders (both police and fire) to share information on the operation and safety practices in the event that an emergency should arise. Parks and Recreation This is not applicable. Solid Waste Disposal The Project requires a “lay down area” for construction materials during the construction phase, but all materials are removed from the site once construction is complete and properly disposed of. Any solar panels that must be replaced will be disposed of as solid waste, if they cannot be recycled. Recycling is an option because most of the materials making up a solar project are recyclable. Solar panels themselves are comprised mostly of commonly-recycled materials such as glass, aluminum, and copper. Even if solar panels themselves are not yet fully recyclable, they are not hazardous and are able to be disposed of in conventional landfills. Other Government Activities A utility scale solar facility does not impact other governmental activities. L. Other Impacts. Virginia has adopted and updated the Commonwealth’s Energy Policy at Va. Code Ann. §67-102. That Policy plainly supports the development of, and the use of, renewable energy sources. The General Assembly has encouraged “[a]ll agencies and political subdivisions of the Commonwealth, in taking discretionary action with regard to energy issues, [to] recognize the elements of the Commonwealth Energy Policy and where appropriate, [to] act in a manner consistent therewith.” Even further, the General Assembly has, by § 56-585.1:4 regarding the development of solar and wind generation capacity in the Commonwealth, determined that before January 1, 2024, the construction or purchase by a public utility of one or more solar generation facilities located in Virginia, having in the aggregate a rated capacity that does not exceed 5,000 megawatts, or its purchase of energy, capacity, and environmental attributes from solar facilities owned by persons other than a public utility, is in the public interest. It has therefore directed the State Corporation Commission to so find if the SCC is required to make a finding regarding whether such construction or purchase is in that public interest. In short, Virginia has made it a major state initiative to increase the percentage of energy that comes from renewable sources, specifically including solar energy. Frederick County has recognized that renewable energy is critical to America’s energy future, and has taken steps to approach utility scale solar in a responsible and reasonable manner. The Project will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the surrounding area. The Project will not cause any direct, physical injury to 232 9 either property or improvements in the neighborhood. It generates no pollutants, and is designed to have no adverse effect on surrounding properties, water sources, or the environment. Solar projects produce clean energy from a non-fossil fuel renewable resource. It is often asserted that the development of a utility scale solar facility will adversely affect the values of properties nearby. Expert appraisers who have researched the effect of the construction of solar farms on nearby property values in various states have concluded that such projects lack the features that are most commonly associated with adverse effects on nearby values. Specifically, they are not associated with hazardous materials, odor, noise, traffic, or stigma. Solar projects are similar to large greenhouses, and are generally in keeping with a rural character. Claims to the contrary are generally anecdotal at best, and the Applicant is aware of no professional study that supports the proposition that such facilities depress land values, when appropriately sited and buffered. This Project provides many benefits to Frederick County. To start with, it does not deplete any water resources or require costly sanitary sewer or other utility infrastructure. It is not a permanent conversion of undeveloped land or increase demand on the County schools. The Project will generate significant increased tax revenue with little or no burden. It strengthens and adds to the capacity of the electrical grid adding to and diversifying sources of electricity. A solar facility does not require significant County services. This Project will provide jobs, tax revenue, and other economic opportunity as explained in more detail below. Tax Payments to Frederick County. Currently, this property is taxed as unimproved (the land value). When the Project is installed, that land value will increase (an estimated two to four times) based upon its use as a solar facility. The taxation on land value is paid in full to the County by the Project. In addition, because the Project will produce over 20 megawatts of AC power, it will also pay a pro-rated portion (20%) of the annual equipment tax on all installed electrical generation equipment at the County’s real estate tax rate. Applicant looks to invest in the region an estimated $60,000,000 in equipment and $40,000,000 on construction and installation activities for this Project. With this investment, the additional tax revenue to Frederick County will be significant. Local Economic Opportunity. The Project will employ several hundred workers during construction. It will help local businesses be positioned to capitalize on this opportunity. We will work with Frederick County to hold an informational event where local businesses can learn more about these opportunities. Those opportunities will range from contractor positions for electrical, general labor, site work, and landscaping to an economic boom for fencing and landscape companies, equipment suppliers, lodging and food vendors, and others. These electrical, civil, site, and other contractors will be encouraged to hire local workers. The largest job opportunities will be during construction. After installation, the Project will require a limited amount of ongoing operations and maintenance work that can produce local jobs for local contractors. Investment in Frederick County. Although it is a soft economic benefit, the media coverage and “branding” associated with solar facilities can be significant. There is clearly a new renewable energy economy emerging in the Commonwealth. Many companies are looking to find communities that support renewable energy development. With this Project, Frederick County can 233 10 be one of the leaders in this area. There are both macro and micro level benefits. One of the broadest reaching benefits is the use of renewable solar energy to produce electricity without extracting valuable natural resources or dependence on foreign raw materials. This solar energy generation facility is installed at a fixed cost investment that provides a reliable stable electricity source for many years without the need for significant reinvestment. Our regional electricity generation capacity is sustainably increased with the resultant economic improvements and without harmful environmental side effects. The Applicant is part of Urban Grid Solar Projects, the utility scale development arm of Urban Grid. A Virginia company, Urban Grid is a leading developer of solar facilities in the Mid- Atlantic Region, with extensive solar project development expertise. Urban Grid delivers solar energy projects that maximize value while delivering a vital source of clean, renewable energy that will help shape the diversified electric grid of the future. Urban Grid is a privately owned renewable energy company that has been developing and installing solar facilities for seven years in Virginia, Maryland, Delaware and across the country. Urban Grid and its partners have successfully designed and have in operation 290 megawatts of solar energy projects globally and have 1400 megawatts in development in the Mid-Atlantic. They are very experienced in the development of renewable energy projects, and bring that experience and lessons learned to implement a successful Project here in Frederick County. The Project will have a significant positive impact by contributing over $136,122 of revenue to the County in year one and over $3 Million over the projected life of the facility. As noted the construction and operation of the Project will make fiscal contributions directly to the County in the form of roll-back-taxes, increased property assessments, and new machinery and tools taxes. It also will bring significant economic benefits to the County, primarily through construction jobs and construction-related spending at local businesses. 234 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN (Frederick County) Revised April 21, 2020 I. Introduction This plan for decommissioning (the “Plan”) is for the Foxglove Solar Project (the “Project”) located in Frederick, County, Virginia (the “County”), and shall be binding on each successor and assignee (the “Facility Owner”). The purpose of the Plan is to ensure the Project is properly removed at the end of the Project’s useful life, or earlier if abandoned in whole or in part, and that the Project site is restored to pre-existing conditions. Pursuant to this Plan, a Decommissioning Cost Estimate will be provided for County review prior to the site plan approval and updated every five (5) years during the Project Life. II. Decommissioning The expected life of the Project is the period during which the facility can produce electrical energy generation (the “Project Life”). At the end of the Project Life, or earlier in the event of abandonment of all or a portion of the Project, the Facility Owner shall decommission the Project or a portion thereof, as set forth below. The decommissioning process for the Project is generally expected to occur as follows (“Decommissioning”):1 1. The following items shall be removed, dissembled (if applicable), packaged and shipped for re-sale or to a salvage/recycling facility or other processing facility where possible, or to a landfill for disposal. a. PV Module b. Racking System c. Mounting Posts d. Electrical wiring/cabling e. Inverters/transformers/connector station f. Fencing g. Concrete Foundations h. Gravel from Access Drive(s) 2. Dispose of any components in a landfill that cannot be salvaged/recycled, re-sold or re- used. 3. Stabilize any exposed soil where equipment was removed, consistent with County and other applicable erosion and sediment control standards. 4. Maintain and replant turf-grass throughout the site, as necessary, unless required otherwise by the landowner. 5. The Project site or portion thereof shall be restored to its pre-development condition. 1 It is expected, but not required, that most components of the Project will be salvageable, recyclable, re-usable or re-salable. 235 2 6. The Project does not generate any hazardous materials. In the unlikely event, and to the extent that, any hazardous materials, as defined by federal, state and/or local laws, are present due to the Project, as part of Decommissioning the Facility Owner shall dispose of all such materials in accordance with applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations governing such materials and the disposal of the same. III. Decommissioning Process Decommissioning generally proceeds in reverse order of installation of the Project: 1. The facility is disconnected from the utility power grid. 2. Solar arrays are disconnected, collected, and either shipped to another project, salvaged, or submitted to a collection and recycling program. 3. Electrical interconnection and distribution cables are removed and recycled off-site by an approved recycler. 4. Array support H-beams and racking are removed and recycled off-site by an approved metals recycler. 5. Electrical and electronic devices, including transformers and inverters are removed and recycled off-site by and approved recycler. 6. Concrete pads (if used for the inverter blocks) are removed and recycled off-site by a concrete recycler. 7. Fencing is removed and recycled off-site by an approved recycler. 8. Any interior Project roads, typically constructed of 4” aggregate base, can either remain onsite should the landowner choose to retain them, or be removed and the gravel repurposed either on-or off-site. 9. Unless agreed otherwise by the landowner, the Project site is returned to its condition prior to installation of the Project, in accordance with applicable land use regulations in effect at the time of Decommissioning. IV. Decommissioning Cost Estimate The Facility Owner shall provide an estimate of the cost to decommission the Project (the “Decommissioning Cost Estimate”) prepared by a Virginia Licensed Engineer prior to site plan approval for installation of the Project, which shall include the following: (a) The gross estimated cost to perform Decommissioning as set forth in Section II above (“Gross Cost”); (b) An administrative and inflation factor of 10% of the Gross Cost (the “Admin Factor”); (c) The estimated resale and salvage values associated with the Project equipment (“Salvage Value”); and (d) A reduction in the Salvage Value by 10% such that only 90% of the Salvage Value can be used as a credit against the Gross Cost and Admin Factor. The Salvage Value multiplied by 90% is the “Salvage Credit.” 236 3 Thus, the Decommissioning Cost Estimate formula is: Gross Cost + Admin Factor – Salvage Credit = the Decommissioning Cost Estimate. The Facility Owner shall provide an updated Decommissioning Cost Estimate on every 5th year anniversary of the date when the Project first began to continuously deliver electric energy to the electric grid for commercial sales (the “Commercial Operation Date”) during the Project Life, which shall account for inflation, cost and value changes, and advances in decommissioning technologies and approaches. If the Project lies on property owned by more than one person, entity or group (multiple owners), the Decommissioning Cost Estimate shall include a table allocating the Decommissioning Cost Estimate across the Project site, based on the percentage of generating capacity in megawatts (MW) attributable to each separately owned part of the property (the “Cost Allocation”). V. Timing for Decommissioning Upon the earlier of: (i) Completion of the Project Life; or (ii) Abandonment of the Project or any portion thereof, the Facility Owner shall promptly arrange for and be responsible for the full Decommissioning of the Project. If the Project or any portion thereof has ceased operations and is not maintained for a continuous period of longer than one (1) year and decommissioning is required before the end of the Project Life, the County may provide written notice of suspected abandonment to the Facility Owner. Upon receipt, the Facility Owner shall have a sixty (60) day period in which to refute the claim, remedy any problem, commence Decommissioning, or show why more than sixty (60) days is reasonably necessary to remedy the problem. If at the end of the sixty (60) day period the parties are unable to resolve amicably any dispute arising out of or in connection with this Decommissioning Plan, then such dispute shall be resolved by an action filed in the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia. VI. Partial Decommissioning If Decommissioning is triggered for a portion, but not the entire Project, prior to the end of the Project Life, the Facility Owner shall commence and complete Decommissioning, in accordance with the Decommissioning Plan, for the applicable portion of the Project. If a portion of the Project is Decommissioned, the remaining portion of the Project would continue to be subject to this Decommissioning Plan. VII. Completion of Decommissioning Decommissioning will be complete when the County Construction Official or County Engineer, or another party appointed by the County, determines that Decommissioning has been completed in accordance with this Decommissioning Plan by issuance of a letter to the Facility Owner. VIII. Default by the Facility Owner If the Facility Owner is in default of its obligation to commence or complete Decommissioning, and such default remains uncured for more than sixty (60) days (as explained in Section V above), each landowner shall have the right to commence Decommissioning activities within the area it owns. 237 4 Nothing herein shall limit other rights or remedies that may be available to the County to enforce the obligations of the Facility Owner, including the County’s zoning powers. IX. Notice under this Decommissioning Plan Foxglove Solar, LLC c/o Urban Grid Solar Projects, LLC 337 Log Canoe Circle Stevensville, MD 21666 Attn: Decommissioning Notice Department of Planning & Development County of Frederick, Virginia 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Attn: Planning Director X. Financial Security Financial security shall be in an amount equal to the Decommissioning Cost Estimate (as determined by a Virginia licensed Engineer in Section III) (the “Decommissioning Security”). When the Decommissioning Cost Estimate is redone during the Project Life, the Facility Owner shall adjust the amount of the Decommissioning Security to match the updated Decommissioning Cost Estimate. If the Facility is not developed by a public utility company or an independent power producer with an investment grade credit rating with Moody’s or Standard and Poor’s (a “Qualified Company”), prior to commencement of commercial operations the Facility Owner shall provide financial security for the removal of the Facility. If the Facility is bought by an entity that is not a Qualified Company, that purchaser shall provide such financial security. If such financial security is required to run to the benefit of the County, such security shall also run to the benefit of the landowner. The Facility Owner will only be required to provide one instrument or obligation equal to the Decommissioning Security to satisfy its obligations to both the County and the landowner. The Decommissioning Security may be provided in one of the following forms: (i) a surety bond, (ii) a letter of credit from a financial institution, (iii) a parent guaranty, or (iv) such other financial instrument as is commonly used in business to secure monetary obligations, so long as such instrument is irrevocable unless replaced with cash or other form of security reasonably acceptable to the parties that benefit from such security. 238 DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE1 OF 2 DATE 02/20/2020 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME C. CHAPPELL FOXGLOVE SOLAR D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! M a r l b or o R d ChapelR d Valley P i k e I81 S Salem Church Rd New e l l D r I 8 1 ,W e i g h S t a t i o n C i d e r M i l l W a y Ser v i c e b e r r y C t H i t e s R d I n e z L n I 8 1 ,W e i g h S t a t i o n Gem D r NewellDr I 8 1 ,W e i g h S ta ti o nDar t e r j o D r C a r r i a g e L n S a p l i n g L n Rector s L n C a m p b e l l L n O l d P l a n t a t i o n L n I8 1 ,W e i g h S t a t i o n Vaucl u se S p r i n g L n O a k H i l l D r N i t t a n y South W a y L i b e r t y L n O g d e n L n Kline s M i l l L n T h eater Ln Middle R d Carters Ln Drover Ln F l y a W a y Buff a l o M a r s h R d S t r o s n i d e r L n RienziKnollLn Vaucluse R d Kli n e s M i l l R d CarsonLn Famil y D r MarshBrookLn I81 N R i d i n g s M i l l R d Bell e V i e w L n WesternviewDr ClarkRd Cones t o g a L n Ger m a n y R d Ser e n i t y L n Tucka h o e L n Str o d e M c l e o d L n 1 " = 1,000 'H: VIEWSHEDANALYSISAT YEAR 0 REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION These plans and associated documents are theexclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP andmay not be reproduced in whole or in part andshall not be used for any purpose whatsoever,inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding,and/or construction staking without the expresswritten consent of TIMMONS GROUP. PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R P R O J E C T FO X G L O V E S O L A R , L L C FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , VI R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE01,000 2,000 SCALE (FEET) \\timmons.com\tgfs\900\852\840\41147 - Foxglove_Solar\GIS\Viewshed Analysis\41147-Viewshed Analysis.mxd 1. Project study limits areapproximate.2. Aerial imagery from VGIN.3. Panels height assumed to be 9foot. Legend Half Mile Buffer Project Limits - 668.5 Acres ! !Transmission Line D D D Fence Solar Panels Project Visibility 239 DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE2 OF 2 DATE 02/20/2020 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME C. CHAPPELL FOXGLOVE SOLAR D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Marlboro Rd Ch a p e l R d V a l l e y P i k e H i t e s R d C e d a r C r e e k G r I 8 1 ,W e i g h S t a t i o n New e l l D r I 8 1 ,W e i g h S t a t i o n C i d e r M i l l W a y Ser v i c e b e r r y C t I n e z L n C h i m n e y C i r Salem ChurchRd I8 1 ,W e i g h S t a t i o n Gem D r NewellDr Dar t e r j o D r Rector s L n C a r r i a g e L n S a p l i n g L n C a m p b e l l L n O g d e n L n Vaucl u se S p r i n g L n O a k H i l l D r N i t t a n y South W a y R i d i n g s M i l l R d L i b e r t y L n Kline s M i l l L n T h eater Ln Middle R d Drover Ln Buff a l o M a r s h R d Carters Ln S t r o s n i d e r L n RienziKnollLn Vaucluse R d F l y a W a y Kli n e s M i l l R d I81 N CarsonLn Famil y D r MarshBrookLn Bell e V i e w L n I81 S WesternviewDr ClarkRd Cones t o g a L n Ger m a n y R d Tucka h o e L n Ser e n i t y L n Str o d e M c l e o d L n 1 " = 1,000 'H: VIEWSHEDANALYSISAT YEAR 5 REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION These plans and associated documents are theexclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP andmay not be reproduced in whole or in part andshall not be used for any purpose whatsoever,inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding,and/or construction staking without the expresswritten consent of TIMMONS GROUP. PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R P R O J E C T FO X G L O V E S O L A R , L L C FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , VI R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE01,000 2,000 SCALE (FEET) \\timmons.com\tgfs\900\852\840\41147 - Foxglove_Solar\GIS\Viewshed Analysis\41147-Viewshed Analysis_LandscapeBuffer.mxd 1. Project study limits areapproximate.2. Aerial imagery from VGIN.3. Panels height assumed to be 9feet.4. Vegetative buffer assumed tobe 13 feet after 5 years of growth. Legend Half Mile Buffer Project Limits - 668.5 Acres Year 5 Landscape Buffer - 13 Feet ! !Transmission Line D D D Fence Solar Panels Project Visitiblity with Landscape Buffer 240 241 Hites Road Existing Conditions 242 Hites Road Year 1 243 Hites Road Year 5 244 Klines Mill Rd Existing Conditions 245 Klines Mill Rd Year 1 246 Klines Mill Rd Year 5 247 Vaucluse Road Existing Conditions 248 Vaucluse Road Year 1 249 Vaucluse Road Year 5 250 PREPARED FOR: Urban Grid Foxglove Solar Protected Species Review August 2018 Prepared By: 1001 Boulders Parkway, Suite 300 Richmond, Virginia 23225 Phone: 804.200.6500 Fax: 804.560.1648 www.Timmons.com Timmons Group Project No. 41147 251 Urban Grid Timmons Group: PN 41147 Foxglov Solar – Protected Species Review August 2018 Page 1 FOXGLOVE SOLAR – PROTECTED SPECIES REVIEW TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction and Background Information ................................................................... 1 2 Protected Species Analysis ............................................................................................ 2 3 Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 5 Attachments Attachment 1 – USFWS IPaC Search Documents Attachment 2 – VDGIF IPA Search Documents and Maps Attachment 3 – VDGIF WERMS Map Attachment 4 – CCB Eagles Nest Locator Map & USFWS Bald Eagle Concentration Areas Map Attachment 5 – VDGIF Northern Long Eared Bat Search Map Attachment 6 – DCR-DNH Database Search Documents Attachment 7 – DCR Project Review Comments (will send this attachment when received) 1 Introduction and Background Information Timmons Group has completed a preliminary desktop evaluation to identify known occurrences and habitat of state and federally protected species at the Foxglove Solar site (Site), including federally and stated threatened and endangered (T&E) species. This updated review includes the additional study limit update that occurred in August 2018. This evaluation satisfies the Permit by Rule regulation requirements related to the analysis of wildlife as outlined in 9VAC15-60-40 A.1 and 2. This evaluation included queries of the following databases:  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Conservation search (IPaC) – provides a list of unofficial federal T&E species within the project limits  USFWS Bald Eagle Concentration Areas mapping tool  The Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) Eagles Nest Locator  The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Services (VaFWIS), Initial Project Assessment (IPA) – includes a search within the project limits and areas within a two (2) mile radius of the project limits, per VDGIF’s IPA recommendations 252 Urban Grid Timmons Group: PN 41237 Foxglove Solar – Protected Species Review August 2018 Page 2  VDGIF Wildlife Environmental Review Map Service (WERMS) – An ArcGIS based mapping tool which contains maps, features, and geodata services on critical wildlife resources including both federal and state protected species.  VDGIF Northern Long-eared Bat (NLEB) mapping tool – provides locations of known hibernaculum and roost trees for these protected species in Virginia  Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation-Department of Natural Heritage (DCR-DNH) watershed search - database for threatened or endangered species known to occur anywhere in the Cedar Creek-Meadow Brook Subwatershed (HUC 02070006 PS75) Project specific comments were also solicited from DCR through their Project Review process to assess the potential impacts of the project on natural heritage resources, including protected plant and insect species. All database results and correspondence are provided in the attached enclosures. Please note that the database search results presented in this report are considered valid for a period of up to 6 months. After this time, the searches are considered out of date and need to be re- evaluated. 2 Protected Species Analysis Based upon the results of the database findings, five (6) protected species have known occurrence and/or the potential to exist within the vicinity of the Site. These species include two (2) federally endangered/state endangered species (FESE), one (1) federally threatened/state threatened (FTST) species, two (2) state endangered species, and one (1) state threatened (ST) species. Details for each of these species, including habitat requirements and potential project impacts are summarized in Table 1: Protected Species Occurrences. Other Notable Species A search of known Bald Eagle nest locations/concentration areas utilizing the William and Mary Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) website and USFWS Bald Eagle Concentration Areas mapping tool indicate there are no known Bald Eagle nests or concentration areas located within 2 miles of the project boundary. Therefore, the Project will not likely affect this protected species and additional agency coordination is not anticipated. In addition, project specific comments received from the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) may mention other protected species. A request for a 30-day turn around Project Review Comments was submitted on 8/24/2018. Those comments will be provided in an addendum report, once received from DCR. 253 Table 1: Protected Species Occurrences. Urban Grid Timmons Group: PN 41147 Foxglove Solar – Protected Species Review August 2018 Page 3 Common Name Scientific Name Species / Habitat Description T&E Status* Agency Search‡ Conclusions/Recommendations Indiana Bat Myotis sodalist Mammal-Hibernating Bat / Over-winter hibernates in mountain caves. In summer they are found along riparian woodlands. Typically nests under loose bark of large snags. FESE USFWS USFWS suggests this species could potentially be affected by activities at this location. However, based on DGIF’s review, this species has not been observed within the project boundaries or within the 2 -mile buffer around the site. Agency coordination will likely be required if state or federal permits are needed, or if project related tree clearing is proposed. Potential TOYR: No significant tree removal at project site from Apr 15 – Sep 15; No significant tree removal within 5 miles of hibernacula from Apr 1 - Nov 15 Harperella Ptilimnium nodosum Vascular Plant/ Typically found in seasonally inundated and frequently flooded rock outcrops. FESE USFWS Based upon a review of available information (Digital Atlas of VA and USDA Plant Atlas), Harperella has never been document or identified in Fredrick County. Therefore, we do not expect to find this species on Site. However, agency coordination will likely be required if state or federal permits are needed. Northern Long- ear Bat (NLEB) Myotis septentrionalis Mammal-Hibernating Bat / Over-winter hibernates in mountain caves. Typically roosts underneath bark, or in cavities of both live trees and snags FTST USFWS Based upon a review of available information there are no known maternity roosts or hibernacula located within or near the Project. Therefore, the Project will not likely be affected by this species as outlined in the USFWS NLEB Final 4(d) Rule. However, agency coordination may be required regarding project related tree clearing. Appalachian Springsnail Fontigens bottimeri Freshwater Snail / Previously identified in cave streams and in small springs SE DGIF DCR-DNH Subwatershed search DGIF and the DCR subwatershed search both indicate this species may be affected by activities occurring on this Site. Confirmed observations of this species have been noted in several stream reaches both onsite and within the 2-mile buffer. Agency coordination will likely be required if federal or state permits are needed. Little Brown Bat Myotis lucifugus Roost/dwell in caves, trees, rocks, buildings, under bridges, in mines and tunnels mainly in forested regions. SE DGIF Although there have been two confirmed observations within the 2-mile buffer surrounding the site, there were no observations onsite and there are no known maternity roosts or hibernacula located within or near the site, based upon review of available database information. Therefore, the project will not likely be affected by this species, but agency coordination will be required to confirm. 254 Table 1: Protected Species Occurrences. Urban Grid Timmons Group: PN 41147 Foxglove Solar – Protected Species Review August 2018 Page 4 *F=Federally, S=State, T=Threatened, E=Endangered. ‡VDGIF= Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, DCR = Department of Conservation and Recreation-Department of Natural Heritage, USFWS= US Fish and Wildlife Service Wood Turtle Glyptemys insculpta Reptile/ Aquatic turtle living in and around perennial streams, roaming in riparian woodlands ST DGIF DCR-DNH Subwatershed search DGIF and the DCR subwatershed search both indicate this species may be affected by activities occurring on this Site. Confirmed observations of this species have been noted in several stream reaches both onsite and within the 2-mile buffer. Agency coordination will likely be required if federal or state permits are needed. Potential TOYR: For instream work: Oct 1 – March 31; For work within 900 feet of stream (zone of concern): April 1 – Sept 30. Maintain undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 300 feet on stream. 255 Urban Grid Timmons Group: PN 41147 Foxglove Solar – Protected Species Review August 2018 Page 5 3 Conclusions Based upon the results of this evaluation, official agency comment and/or coordination regarding protected species will be required if federal and/or state permits are needed for the development of this Site. Protected species of concern for this site are the Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalist), Appalachian Springsnail (Fontigens bottimeri), and the Wood Turtle (Glyptemys insculpta). USFWS, DGIF, and DCR-DNH databases indicate that these state and federally endangered species may occur within the vicinity of the project area or that potential habitat may exist onsite. A search using VDGIF NLEB mapping tools show no known maternity roosts or hibernacula located within or near the project boundaries. Therefore, the Project will not likely affect any known NLEB areas. However, under the NLEB final 4(d) rule, the USFWS reserves the right to request additional studies or information during consultation with federal permitting agencies. In addition, project specific comments received from the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) may mention species not covered in this desktop analysis. A request for a 30-day turn around Project Review Comments was submitted on 8/24/2018. Those comments will be included in an addendum to this report once received. In order to obtain clearances and/or required mitigation for protected species within the project site, official agencies coordination will be necessary. Coordination will need to include the VDGIF, and USFWS. Currently, these federal and state agencies are unable to provide project evaluation/coordination until a project is reviewed through an interagency coordination process. Specific events trigger this coordination process include:  Permit applications o Joint “dredge-and-fill” permits o VPDES and VWPP permits (VDEQ) o Small Renewable Energy Facility permits-by-rule (PBRs)  FERC license application and SCC applications  Environmental documents o Environmental Impact Reports or Statements o Environmental Assessments o Other NEPA documents o Coastal Consistency Determinations o Section 7 (Endangered Species Act) reviews for selected state and federal agency projects only  Proposed state or federal legislation or regulations  Federal land and wildlife management plans for parks, refuges, forests, and DOD lands  Miscellaneous projects such as Landowner Incentive Program projects; projects proposed on or adjacent to VDGIF Wildlife Management Areas, boat ramps, public fishing lakes, or hatcheries; gypsy moth spray blocks, etc.  VDOT projects and locality administered transportation projects 256 Urban Grid Timmons Group: PN 41147 Foxglove Solar – Protected Species Review August 2018 Page 6  VDCR Recreation Grant Project Reviews: Land and Water Conservation Fund projects & Recreation Trails Program projects Prior to formal agency review, surveys for the presence/absence of these protected species can be completed to further understand if these species are present on the site and to help in determining how they may or may not impact site development. Timmons Group can provide survey services upon request. 257 ATTACHMENT 1 USFWS IPaC SEARCH DOCUMENTS 258 8/23/2018 IPaC: Explore Location https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/WKDQEVRQBRFG5FTVYVA6KNDB6I/resources 1/9 IPaC resource list This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly a 8/23/2018 IPaC: Explore Location https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/WKDQEVRQBRFG5FTVYVA6KNDB6I/resources 2/9 Endangered species This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts. The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of in 8/23/2018 IPaC: Explore Location https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/WKDQEVRQBRFG5FTVYVA6KNDB6I/resources 3/9 Flowering Plants Critical habitats Potential e 8/23/2018 IPaC: Explore Location https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/WKDQEVRQBRFG5FTVYVA6KNDB6I/resources 4/9 The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may 8/23/2018 IPaC: Explore Location https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/WKDQEVRQBRFG5FTVYVA6KNDB6I/resources 5/9 no data survey e 8/23/2018 IPaC: Explore Location https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/WKDQEVRQBRFG5FTVYVA6KNDB6I/resources 6/9 SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Bobolink BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.) Prairie Warbler BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.) Red-headed Woodpecker BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.) Wood Thrush BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.) Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds. Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site. What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my speci 8/23/2018 IPaC: Explore Location https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/WKDQEVRQBRFG5FTVYVA6KNDB6I/resources 7/9 What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my speci 8/23/2018 IPaC: Explore Location https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/WKDQEVRQBRFG5FTVYVA6KNDB6I/resources 8/9 Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ “What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my speci 8/23/2018 IPaC: Explore Location https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/WKDQEVRQBRFG5FTVYVA6KNDB6I/resources 9/9 Data limitations The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identi ATTACHMENT 2 VDGIF IPA SEARCH DOCUMENTS AND MAPS 268 8/23/2018 VaFWIS Map https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/fwis/maps/zMapFormJava.asp?v=082315 1/2 VaFWIS - Department of Game and Inland Fisheries 39.07443 -78.27333 is the Search Point Submit Cancel Search Point Change to "clicked" map point Fixed at 39.07443 -78.27333 Show Position Rings Yes No 1 mile and 1/4 mile at the Search Point Show Search Area Yes No Search distance miles buffer Search Point is at map center Base Map Choices BW Aerial Photography Map Overlay Choices Current List: TEWaters, BAEANests, BECAR, TierII, Search Map Overlay Legend back Refresh Browser Page Map Click Map Scale Screen Size Help Point of Search 39.07443 -78.27333 Map Location 39.07443 -78.27333 Select Coordinate System:Degrees,Minutes,Seconds Latitude - Longitude Decimal Degrees Latitude - Longitude Meters UTM NAD83 East North Zone Meters UTM NAD27 East North Zone Base Map source: Black & White USGS Aerial Photography (see Microsoft terraserver-usa.com for details) 2 269 8/23/2018 VaFWIS Map https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/fwis/maps/zMapFormJava.asp?v=082315 2/2 Map projection is UTM Zone 17 NAD 1983 with left 727878 and top 4336577. Pixel size is 16 meters . Coordinates displayed are decimal Degrees North and West. Map is currently displayed as 1000 columns by 1000 rows for a total of 1000000 pixles. The map display represents 16000 meters east to west by 16000 meters north to south for a total of 256.0 square kilometers. The map display represents 52502 feet east to west by 52502 feet north to south for a total of 98.8 square miles. Topographic maps and Black and white aerial photography for year 1990+- are from the United States Department of the Interior, United States Geological Survey. Color aerial photography aquired 2002 is from Virginia Base Mapping Program, Virginia Geographic Information Network. Shaded topographic maps are from TOPO! ©2006 National Geographic http://www.national.geographic.com/topo All other map products are from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. map assembled 2018-08-23 15:46:11 (qa/qc March 21, 2016 12:20 - tn=926537 dist=3218 I ) $poi=39.0920000 -78.2738200 | DGIF | Credits | Disclaimer | Contact shirl.dressler@dgif.virginia.gov |Please view our privacy policy | © 1998-2018 Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries 270 8/23/2018 VaFWIS Map https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/maps/zMapFormJava.asp?autoscale=14&coord=LL&display_only=1&dist=3218&dp=&gap=&ln=timmons&opoi=&overla…1/2 7 Species Observations where Bat, little brown (050020) observed 39,05,31.2 -78,16,25.7 is the Search Point Show Position Rings Yes No 1 mile and 1/4 mile at the Search Point Show Search Area Yes No Search distance miles buffer Display at center Search Point is not at map center Base Map Choices BW Aerial Photography Map Overlay Choices Current List: Search, SppObs Map Overlay Legend back Refresh Browser Page Map Click Map Scale Screen Size Help Point of Search 39,05,31.2 -78,16,25.7 Map Location 39,04,27.9 -78,16,24.0 Select Coordinate System:Degrees,Minutes,Seconds Latitude - Longitude Decimal Degrees Latitude - Longitude Meters UTM NAD83 East North Zone Meters UTM NAD27 East North Zone Base Map source: Black & White USGS Aerial Photography (see Microsoft terraserver-usa.com for details) 2 271 8/23/2018 VaFWIS Map https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/maps/zMapFormJava.asp?autoscale=14&coord=LL&display_only=1&dist=3218&dp=&gap=&ln=timmons&opoi=&overla…2/2 Map projection is UTM Zone 17 NAD 1983 with left 727878 and top 4336577. Pixel size is 16 meters . Coordinates displayed are Degrees, Minutes, Seconds North and West. Map is currently displayed as 1000 columns by 1000 rows for a total of 1000000 pixles. The map display represents 16000 meters east to west by 16000 meters north to south for a total of 256.0 square kilometers. The map display represents 52502 feet east to west by 52502 feet north to south for a total of 98.8 square miles. Topographic maps and Black and white aerial photography for year 1990+- are from the United States Department of the Interior, United States Geological Survey. Color aerial photography aquired 2002 is from Virginia Base Mapping Program, Virginia Geographic Information Network. Shaded topographic maps are from TOPO! ©2006 National Geographic http://www.national.geographic.com/topo All other map products are from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. map assembled 2018-08-23 15:53:35 (qa/qc March 21, 2016 12:20 - tn=926537.1 dist=3218 I ) $poi=39.0920000 -78.2738199 | DGIF | Credits | Disclaimer | Contact shirl.dressler@dgif.virginia.gov |Please view our privacy policy | © 1998-2018 Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries 272 8/23/2018 VAFWIS Seach Report https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/fwis/NewPages/VaFWIS_report_search.asp?pf=1&Title=VaFWIS+Report+Search&commonName=Bat,+little+brown&co…1/2 Help Known or likely to occur within a 2 mile buffer around line beginning 39.0920000 -78.2738199 in 069 Frederick County, VA where (050020) Bat, little brown observed. View Map of Site Location Species Observations where Bat, little brown (050020) observed ( 7 records , 7 Observations with Threatened or Endangered species ) View Map of All Query Results Species Observations where Bat, little brown (050020) observed 8/23/2018 3:55:23 PM Fish and Wildlife Information Service Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries VaFWIS Search Report Compiled on 8/23/2018, 3:55:23 PM obsID class Date Observed Observer N Species View MapDifferent Species Highest TE* Highest Tier** 230931 SppObs May 26 2008 Sanders: Danielle Ireton, Jason Collins 2 SE I Yes 230932 SppObs May 24 2008 Sanders: K. Voochees, Chris Sanders 2 SE I Yes 230937 SppObs May 18 2008 Sanders: Clayton Lutz, Jen Hicks 2 SE I Yes 230939 SppObs May 18 2008 Sanders: D. Ireton, C. Sanders 2 SE I Yes 230935 SppObs May 17 2008 Sanders: Mike Schneider, Chelsea Albertson 1 SE I Yes 230936 SppObs May 17 2008 Sanders: Clay Lutz, Jen Hicks. 5 SE I Yes 230934 SppObs May 15 2008 Sanders: Mike Schneider, Chelsea Albertson 1 SE I Yes Displayed 7 Species Observations where Bat, little brown (050020) observed *FE=Federal Endangered; FT=Federal Threatened; SE=State Endangered; ST=State Threatened; FP=Federal Proposed; FC=Federal Candidate; CC=Collection Concern **I=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier I - Critical Conservation Need; II=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier II - Very High Conservation Need; III=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier III - High Conservation Need; IV=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier IV - Moderate Conservation Need Virginia Widlife Action Plan Conservation Opportunity Ranking: a - On the ground management strategies/actions exist and can be feasibly implemented.; b - On the ground actions or research needs have been identified but cannot feasibly be implemented at this time.; c - No on the ground actions or research needs have been identified or all identified conservation opportunities have been exhausted. 273 8/23/2018 VAFWIS Seach Report https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/fwis/NewPages/VaFWIS_report_search.asp?pf=1&Title=VaFWIS+Report+Search&commonName=Bat,+little+brown&co…2/2 Compiled on 8/23/2018, 3:55:23 PM I926537.1 report=BOVA searchType= L dist= 3218 poi= 39.0920000 -78.2738199 audit no. 926537 8/23/2018 3:55:23 PM Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service © 1998-2018 Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries 274 8/23/2018 VaFWIS Map https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/maps/zMapFormJava.asp?autoscale=14&coord=LL&display_only=1&dist=3218&dp=&gap=&ln=timmons&opoi=&overla…1/2 Threatened and Endangered Waters where Turtle, wood (030062) observed 39,05,31.2 -78,16,25.7 is the Search Point Show Position Rings Yes No 1 mile and 1/4 mile at the Search Point Show Search Area Yes No Search distance miles buffer Display at center Search Point is not at map center Base Map Choices BW Aerial Photography Map Overlay Choices Current List: Search, TEWaters Map Overlay Legend back Refresh Browser Page Map Click Map Scale Screen Size Help Point of Search 39,05,31.2 -78,16,25.7 Map Location 39,04,27.9 -78,16,24.0 Select Coordinate System:Degrees,Minutes,Seconds Latitude - Longitude Decimal Degrees Latitude - Longitude Meters UTM NAD83 East North Zone Meters UTM NAD27 East North Zone Base Map source: Black & White USGS Aerial Photography (see Microsoft terraserver-usa.com for details) 2 275 8/23/2018 VaFWIS Map https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/maps/zMapFormJava.asp?autoscale=14&coord=LL&display_only=1&dist=3218&dp=&gap=&ln=timmons&opoi=&overla…2/2 Map projection is UTM Zone 17 NAD 1983 with left 727878 and top 4336577. Pixel size is 16 meters . Coordinates displayed are Degrees, Minutes, Seconds North and West. Map is currently displayed as 1000 columns by 1000 rows for a total of 1000000 pixles. The map display represents 16000 meters east to west by 16000 meters north to south for a total of 256.0 square kilometers. The map display represents 52502 feet east to west by 52502 feet north to south for a total of 98.8 square miles. Topographic maps and Black and white aerial photography for year 1990+- are from the United States Department of the Interior, United States Geological Survey. Color aerial photography aquired 2002 is from Virginia Base Mapping Program, Virginia Geographic Information Network. Shaded topographic maps are from TOPO! ©2006 National Geographic http://www.national.geographic.com/topo All other map products are from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. map assembled 2018-08-23 15:59:26 (qa/qc March 21, 2016 12:20 - tn=926537.1 dist=3218 I ) $poi=39.0920000 -78.2738199 | DGIF | Credits | Disclaimer | Contact shirl.dressler@dgif.virginia.gov |Please view our privacy policy | © 1998-2018 Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries 276 8/23/2018 VAFWIS Seach Report https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/fwis/NewPages/VaFWIS_report_search.asp?pf=1&Title=VaFWIS+Report+Search&commonName=Turtle,+wood&comm…1/3 Help Known or likely to occur within a 2 mile buffer around line beginning 39.0920000 -78.2738199 in 069 Frederick County, VA where (030062) Turtle, wood observed. View Map of Site Location Threatened and Endangered Waters where Turtle, wood (030062) observed ( 15 Reaches )View Map of All Threatened and Endangered Waters 8/23/2018 4:00:58 PM Fish and Wildlife Information Service Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries VaFWIS Search Report Compiled on 8/23/2018, 4:00:58 PM Stream Name T&E Waters Species View MapHighest TE*BOVA Code, Status*, Tier**, Common & Scientific Name Meadow Brook (012679 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (02941 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (02967 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (030257 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (031659 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (031663 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (035797 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (038085 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (0395267 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (041248 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (07077 ST Yes 277 8/23/2018 VAFWIS Seach Report https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/fwis/NewPages/VaFWIS_report_search.asp?pf=1&Title=VaFWIS+Report+Search&commonName=Turtle,+wood&comm…2/3 Species Observations where Turtle, wood (030062) observed ( 1 records , 1 Observation with Threatened or Endangered species ) View Map of All Query Results Species Observations where Turtle, wood (030062) observed Habitat Predicted for Aquatic WAP Tier I & II Species where Turtle, wood (030062) observed ( 8 Reaches ) View Map Combined Reaches from Below of Habitat Predicted for WAP Tier I & II Aquatic Species )030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Meadow Brook (07670 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (08676 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Meadow Brook (08781 )ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes To view All 15 Threatened and Endangered Waters records View 15 *FE=Federal Endangered; FT=Federal Threatened; SE=State Endangered; ST=State Threatened; FP=Federal Proposed; FC=Federal Candidate; CC=Collection Concern **I=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier I - Critical Conservation Need; II=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier II - Very High Conservation Need; III=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier III - High Conservation Need; IV=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier IV - Moderate Conservation Need Virginia Widlife Action Plan Conservation Opportunity Ranking: a - On the ground management strategies/actions exist and can be feasibly implemented.; b - On the ground actions or research needs have been identified but cannot feasibly be implemented at this time.; c - No on the ground actions or research needs have been identified or all identified conservation opportunities have been exhausted. obsID class Date Observed Observer N Species View MapDifferent Species Highest TE* Highest Tier** 64628 SppObs Apr 13 2000 DR. CARL ERNST ( PRINCIPLE PERMITTEE), THOMAS AKRE (COLLECTOR), DEPT. BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES GMU 1 ST I Yes Displayed 1 Species Observations where Turtle, wood (030062) observed Stream Name Tier Species View MapHighest TE*BOVA Code, Status*, Tier**, Common & Scientific Name Fawcett Run (20700061) ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta 060201 SE IIc Springsnail,Fontigens Yes 278 8/23/2018 VAFWIS Seach Report https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/fwis/NewPages/VaFWIS_report_search.asp?pf=1&Title=VaFWIS+Report+Search&commonName=Turtle,+wood&comm…3/3 Habitat Predicted for Terrestrial WAP Tier I & II Species where Turtle, wood (030062) observed Appalachian bottimeri Meadow Brook (20700061)ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Middle Marsh Brook (20700061)ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes tributary (20700061) ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes tributary (20700071) ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes tributary (20700072) ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes Watson Run (20700061) ST 030062 ST Ia Turtle, wood Glyptemys insculpta Yes N/A Compiled on 8/23/2018, 4:00:58 PM I926537.1 report=BOVA searchType= L dist= 3218 poi= 39.0920000 -78.2738199 audit no. 926537 8/23/2018 4:00:58 PM Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service © 1998-2018 Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries 279 8/23/2018 VaFWIS Map https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/maps/zMapFormJava.asp?autoscale=14&coord=LL&display_only=1&dist=3218&dp=&gap=&ln=timmons&opoi=&overla…1/2 Threatened and Endangered Waters where Springsnail, Appalachian (060201) observed 39,05,31.2 -78,16,25.7 is the Search Point Show Position Rings Yes No 1 mile and 1/4 mile at the Search Point Show Search Area Yes No Search distance miles buffer Display at center Search Point is not at map center Base Map Choices BW Aerial Photography Map Overlay Choices Current List: Search, TEWaters Map Overlay Legend back Refresh Browser Page Map Click Map Scale Screen Size Help Point of Search 39,05,31.2 -78,16,25.7 Map Location 39,04,27.9 -78,16,24.0 Select Coordinate System:Degrees,Minutes,Seconds Latitude - Longitude Decimal Degrees Latitude - Longitude Meters UTM NAD83 East North Zone Meters UTM NAD27 East North Zone Base Map source: Black & White USGS Aerial Photography (see Microsoft terraserver-usa.com for details) 2 280 8/23/2018 VaFWIS Map https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/maps/zMapFormJava.asp?autoscale=14&coord=LL&display_only=1&dist=3218&dp=&gap=&ln=timmons&opoi=&overla…2/2 Map projection is UTM Zone 17 NAD 1983 with left 727878 and top 4336577. Pixel size is 16 meters . Coordinates displayed are Degrees, Minutes, Seconds North and West. Map is currently displayed as 1000 columns by 1000 rows for a total of 1000000 pixles. The map display represents 16000 meters east to west by 16000 meters north to south for a total of 256.0 square kilometers. The map display represents 52502 feet east to west by 52502 feet north to south for a total of 98.8 square miles. Topographic maps and Black and white aerial photography for year 1990+- are from the United States Department of the Interior, United States Geological Survey. Color aerial photography aquired 2002 is from Virginia Base Mapping Program, Virginia Geographic Information Network. Shaded topographic maps are from TOPO! ©2006 National Geographic http://www.national.geographic.com/topo All other map products are from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. map assembled 2018-08-23 15:57:25 (qa/qc March 21, 2016 12:20 - tn=926537.1 dist=3218 I ) $poi=39.0920000 -78.2738199 | DGIF | Credits | Disclaimer | Contact shirl.dressler@dgif.virginia.gov |Please view our privacy policy | © 1998-2018 Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries 281 8/23/2018 VAFWIS Seach Report https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/fwis/NewPages/VaFWIS_report_search.asp?pf=1&Title=VaFWIS+Report+Search&commonName=Springsnail,+Appalac…1/2 Help Known or likely to occur within a 2 mile buffer around line beginning 39.0920000 -78.2738199 in 069 Frederick County, VA where (060201) Springsnail, Appalachian observed. View Map of Site Location Threatened and Endangered Waters where Springsnail, Appalachian (060201) observed ( 14 Reaches )View Map of All Threatened and Endangered Waters 8/23/2018 3:58:57 PM Fish and Wildlife Information Service Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries VaFWIS Search Report Compiled on 8/23/2018, 3:58:57 PM Stream Name T&E Waters Species View MapHighest TE*BOVA Code, Status*, Tier**, Common & Scientific Name Buffalo Marsh Run (028363 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes Buffalo Marsh Run (030206 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes Buffalo Marsh Run (031697 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes Buffalo Marsh Run (031734 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes Buffalo Marsh Run (031908 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes Buffalo Marsh Run (032717 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes Buffalo Marsh Run (032866 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes Buffalo Marsh Run (035385 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes Buffalo Marsh Run (035477 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes Buffalo Marsh Run (035577 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes Buffalo Marsh Run SE Yes 282 8/23/2018 VAFWIS Seach Report https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/fwis/NewPages/VaFWIS_report_search.asp?pf=1&Title=VaFWIS+Report+Search&commonName=Springsnail,+Appalac…2/2 Species Observations where Springsnail, Appalachian (060201) observed Habitat Predicted for Aquatic WAP Tier I & II Species where Springsnail, Appalachian (060201) observed ( 1 Reach ) View Map Combined Reaches from Below of Habitat Predicted for WAP Tier I & II Aquatic Species Habitat Predicted for Terrestrial WAP Tier I & II Species where Springsnail, Appalachian (060201) observed (038035 )060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Buffalo Marsh Run (041054 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes Buffalo Marsh Run (041055 )SE 060201 SE IIc Springsnail, Appalachian Fontigens bottimeri Yes To view All 14 Threatened and Endangered Waters records View 14 *FE=Federal Endangered; FT=Federal Threatened; SE=State Endangered; ST=State Threatened; FP=Federal Proposed; FC=Federal Candidate; CC=Collection Concern **I=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier I - Critical Conservation Need; II=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier II - Very High Conservation Need; III=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier III - High Conservation Need; IV=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier IV - Moderate Conservation Need Virginia Widlife Action Plan Conservation Opportunity Ranking: a - On the ground management strategies/actions exist and can be feasibly implemented.; b - On the ground actions or research needs have been identified but cannot feasibly be implemented at this time.; c - No on the ground actions or research needs have been identified or all identified conservation opportunities have been exhausted. N/A Stream Name Tier Species View MapHighest TE*BOVA Code, Status*, Tier**, Common & Scientific Name N/A Compiled on 8/23/2018, 3:58:57 PM I926537.1 report=BOVA searchType= L dist= 3218 poi= 39.0920000 -78.2738199 audit no. 926537 8/23/2018 3:58:57 PM Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service © 1998-2018 Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries 283 ATTACHMENT 3 VDGIF WERMS MAP 284 DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE 1 DATE 08/23/2018 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME L. MAJOR FOXGLOVE SOLAR Bat, littlebrown Bat, littlebrown Bat, littlebrown Bat, littlebrown Bat, littlebrown 1 " = 1,800 'H: WILDLIFE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW MAP REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION These exhibits and associated documents are the exclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE01,800 3,600 SCALE (FEET) Y:\804\99999 - Urban_Grid\41147-Foxglove-Fredrick County\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-WERMS.mxd Legend Project Study Limits - 557.4 Acres 2 Mile Project Buffer #*NLEB Roost Trees - Not Present Threatened/Endangered Waters Trout Streams Anadromous Fish Use - Not Present Bald Eagle Concentration Areas and Roosts - Not Present Colonial Water Birds - Not Present Bat Hibernacula - Not Present Federal Threatened / State Endangered Observation Area Species Observed - Federal Status, State Status Non-Threatened, Non-Endangered Non-Threatened, State Endangered Project Limits are approximate. WERMS data from DGIF. Aerial imagery from VGIN. NOTES Species Name Federal Status State Status Bat, little brown Non-Threatened State Endangered Bat, big brown Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Bat, eastern red Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Bat, hoary Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Bluebird, eastern Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Bullfrog, American Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Dace, blacknose Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Dace, pearl Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Darter, fantail Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Frog, pickerel Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Salamander, cave Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Thrasher, brown Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Watersnake, northern Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Wren, house Non-Threatened Non-Endangered Species Observed within 2 Miles 285 ATTACHMENT 4 CCB EAGLES NEST LOCATOR MAP AND USFWS BALD EAGLE CONCENTRATION AREAS MAP 286 NLEB Locations and Roost Trees Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, USGS, EPA, NPS NLEB Known Occupied Maternity Roost (Summer Habitat) NLEB Hibernaculum 5.5 Mile Buffer NLEB Hibernaculum Half Mile Buffer 8/23/2018, 4:04:03 PM 0 40 8020mi 0 70 14035km 1:2,311,162 Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, USGS, EPA, NPS | VA Dept. Game & Inland Fisheries 287 ATTACHMENT 5 VDGIF NORTHERN LONG EARED BAT SEARCH MAP 288 8/23/2018 ArcGIS - USFWS Bald Eagle Concentration Areas - Virginia https://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.html 1/1 VITA, West Virginia GIS, Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, NGA, EPA, USDA, NPS USFWS Bald Eagle Concentration Areas - Virginia This map depicts designated Bald Eagle Concentration Areas in the State of Virginia. The Intent of this map is to provide information to the public about shoreline areas that ar ... Foxglove Solar Site Eagle Concentration Areas December 15 to March 15 May 15 to August 31 and December 15 to March 15 USFWS Northeast Region States 289 Layers: Va Eagle Nest Locator Map Center (longitude, latitude): (-78.2449722290039, 39.079974145329246) Report Generated On: 08/24/2018 290 ATTACHMENT 6 DCR-DNH SUBWATERSHED SEARCH DOCUMENTS 291 Natural Heritage Resources Your Criteria Global Conservation Status Rank: Select All State Conservation Status Rank: Select All Federal Legal Status: Select All State Legal Status: Select All County: Frederick Watershed (8 digit HUC): 02070006 - No. Fork Shenandoah River Subwatershed (12 digit HUC): PS75 - Cedar Creek-Meadow Brook Search Run: 8/23/2018 15:41:32 PM Result Summary Total Species returned: 4 Total Communities returned: 0 Click scientific names below to go to NatureServe report. Click column headings for an explanation of species and community ranks. 1 / 2 292 Common Name/Natural Community Scientific Name Global Conservation Status Rank State Conservation Status Rank Federal Legal Status State Legal Status Statewide Occurrences Virginia Coastal Zone Frederick North Fork Shenandoah Cedar Creek-Meadow Brook COLEOPTERA (BEETLES) Hupps Hill Cave Beetle Pseudanophth almus parvicollis G1 S1 SOC None 2 N GASTROPODA (SNAILS) Appalachian Springsnail Fontigens bottimeri G2G3 S2S3 SOC LE 6 N REPTILES Wood Turtle Glyptemys insculpta G3 S2 None LT 47 N VASCULAR PLANTS Canby's Mountain-lover Paxistima canbyi G2 S2 SOC None 35 N Note: On-line queries provide basic information from DCR's databases at the time of the request. They are NOT to be substituted for a project review or for on-site surveys required for environmental assessments of specific project areas. For Additional Information on locations of Natural Heritage Resources please submit an information request. To Contribute information on locations of natural heritage resources, please fill out and submit a rare species sighting form. Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) 2 / 2 293 ATTACHMENT 7 DCR PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS 294 Matthew J. Strickler Secretary of Natural Resources Clyde E. Cristman Director 600 East Main Street, 24th Floor | Richmond, Virginia 23219 | 804-786-6124 State Parks • Soil and Water Conservation • Outdoor Recreation Planning Natural Heritage • Dam Safety and Floodplain Management • Land Conservation Rochelle Altholz Deputy Director of Administration and Finance Russell W. Baxter Deputy Director of Dam Safety & Floodplain Management and Soil & Water Conservation Thomas L. Smith Deputy Director of Operations September 22, 2018 Marjorie Siwy Timmons Group 1001 Boulders Parkway, Suite 300 Richmond, VA 23225 Re: 41147, Foxglove Solar- Two Project Sites Dear Ms. Siwy: The Department of Conservation and Recreation's Division of Natural Heritage (DCR) has searched its Biotics Data System for occurrences of natural heritage resources from the area outlined on the submitted map. Natural heritage resources are defined as the habitat of rare, threatened, or endangered plant and animal species, unique or exemplary natural communities, and significant geologic formations. This project is situated on karst-forming carbonate rock and can be characterized by sinkholes, caves, disappearing streams, and large springs. The Virginia DCR karst staff screened this project against the Virginia Speleological Survey (VSS) database and the Virginia DMME sinkhole coverage for documented sensitive karst features and caves. The Ogdens Conservation Site is located within two miles of the project sites. Conservation sites are tools for representing key areas of the landscape that warrant further review for possible conservation action because of the natural heritage resources and habitat they support. Conservation sites are polygons built around one or more rare plant, animal, or natural community designed to include the element and, where possible, its associated habitat, and buffer or other adjacent land thought necessary for the element’s conservation. Conservation sites are given a biodiversity significance ranking based on the rarity, quality, and number of element occurrences they contain; on a scale of 1-5, 1 being most significant. Ogdens Conservation Site has been given a biodiversity significance ranking of B1, which represents a site of outstanding significance. The natural heritage resources of concern at this site are: Pseudanophthalmus parvicollis Hupps Hill Cave beetle G1/S1/NL/NL Fontigens bottimeri Appalachian springsnail G2G3/S2S3/NL/LE Stygobromus biggersi Bigger’s Cave amphipod G2G4/S1S2/NL/NL Significant cave G3/SNR/NL/NL The more northwestern of the two sites will directly negatively impact Ogdens Cave and the Ogdens Conservation Site. All surface runoff from this site will feed into Buffalo Marsh Run and eventually make its way into Ogdens Cave. Water that makes its way into the groundwater below this site is likely to recharge at Blue Spring. This spring also feeds into Ogdens Cave. Ogdens cave is home to the Appalachian Springsnail, which is a state listed species, and coordination with DGIF about this endangered snail is recommended. The cave is also home to the Hupps Hill Cave Beetle. This cave beetle is one of the rarest in the state. It is only known from two 295 locations. One of these locations is Ogdens Cave. Recent work with this species by DCR, Division of Natural Heritage's Karst Program indicates that the beetle may be completely extirpated from the other site leaving Ogdens Cave as its only know location. The Karst Program recently conducted a study on 17 rare cave beetles in Virginia for the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Based on the data from this study it is extremely likely that DCR will recommend to US Fish and Wildlife that they consider listing this species and we are currently in discussion with the USFWS about this topic. Ogdens Cave also contains Bigger's Cave Amphipod. Based on the resources that may be impacted at Ogdens Cave by the development of a solar energy project at the northwestern site, this location is not recommended. Impacts could be severe for the resources that inhabit this cave and the groundwater they depend on. The project site to the southeast also could impact Ogdens Cave but not as severely. Most of the water from this site would be captured by the watersheds to the southeast of the Ogdens watershed. Most of the southeastern site should overlay the recharge zone for Vaucluse Spring directly to the east of the site. DCR recommends strict adherence to proper standard erosion and sediment control measures including best management practices to ensure drainage from the project site does not enter any caves or sinkholes that are nearby. While no sinkholes are shown on the DMME sinkhole coverage used for this review for these sites, it is possible that sinkholes that are not delineated may be encountered on the sites. If sinkholes do occur within the project area they should be avoided to help reduce any potential impact from the development of a solar farm at this location. Most of the water on these two sites will make its way into a very fragile groundwater system. Contamination in this area could have dramatically detrimental consequences to the species that depend on it. If herbicides and or pesticides are to be used on the site for maintenance the potential impact to groundwater resources should be taken into account in the selection process. No known caves are within the two project footprints provided for this review. If karst features such as sinkholes, caves, disappearing streams, and large springs are encountered during the project, please coordinate with Wil Orndorff (540-230-5960, Wil.Orndorff@dcr.virginia.gov) to document and minimize adverse impacts. Discharge of runoff to sinkholes or sinking streams, filling of sinkholes, and alteration of cave entrances can lead to surface collapse, flooding, erosion and sedimentation, groundwater contamination, and degradation of subterranean habitat for natural heritage resources. If the project involves filling or “improvement” of sinkholes or cave openings, DCR would like detailed location information and copies of the design specifications. In cases where sinkhole improvement is for storm water discharge, copies of VDOT Form EQ-120 will suffice. In addition, Buffalo Marsh Run, which has been designated by the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) as a “Threatened and Endangered Species Water” is and adjacent to the project area. The species associated with the Buffalo Marsh Run T & E Water is the Appalachian springsnail. Due to the legal status of the Appalachian springsnail, DCR recommends coordination with Virginia's regulatory authority for the management and protection of this species, the VDGIF, to ensure compliance with the Virginia Endangered Species Act (VA ST §§ 29.1-563 – 570). DCR also recommends the development of an invasive species management plan for the project and the planting of native pollinator plants in the buffer areas of the planned facility which bloom throughout the spring and summer. Please note, Ogdens Cave Natural Area Preserve is located approximately 2.1 miles southwest of the southeast project site. For more information, please contact Tyler Urgo, DCR Shenandoah Valley Region Steward at (540) 332-9226 or tyler.urgo@dcr.virginia.gov. Under a Memorandum of Agreement established between the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) and the DCR, DCR represents VDACS in comments regarding potential impacts on state- listed threatened and endangered plant and insect species. The current activity will not affect any documented state-listed plants or insects. 296 New and updated information is continually added to Biotics. Please re-submit a completed order form and project map for an update on this natural heritage information if the scope of the project changes and/or six months has passed before it is utilized. A fee of $250.00 has been assessed for the service of providing this information. Please find attached an invoice for that amount. Please return one copy of the invoice along with your remittance made payable to the Treasurer of Virginia, DCR Finance, 600 East Main Street, 24th Floor, Richmond, VA 23219. Payment is due within thirty days of the invoice date. Late payment may result in the suspension of project review service for future projects. The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) maintains a database of wildlife locations, including threatened and endangered species, trout streams, and anadromous fish waters that may contain information not documented in this letter. Their database may be accessed from http://vafwis.org/fwis/ or contact Ernie Aschenbach at 804-367-2733 or Ernie.Aschenbach@dgif.virginia.gov. According to the information currently in our files, Meadow Brook and Middle Marsh Brook, which have been designated by the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) as “Threatened and Endangered Species Waters” for the Wood turtle are within 2 miles of the project area. Therefore, DCR recommends coordination with Virginia's regulatory authority for the management and protection of this species, the VDGIF, to ensure compliance with the Virginia Endangered Species Act (VA ST §§ 29.1-563 – 570). Should you have any questions or concerns, feel free to contact me at 804-371-2708. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. Sincerely, S. René Hypes Project Review Coordinator Cc: Ernie Aschenbach, VDGIF Wil Orndorff, DCR-Karst Tyler Urgo, DCR- Shenandoah Valley Region Steward 297 CIVIL ENGINEERING | ENVIRONMENTAL | SURVEYING | GIS | LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE | CONSTRUCTION SERVICES www.timmons.com PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT FOXGLOVE SOLAR APPROXIMATELY 406 ACRES FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA PREPARED FOR: FOXGLOVE SOLAR, LLC PREPARED BY: TIMMONS GROUP 5410 TRINITY ROAD, SUITE 102 RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27607 Inspection Date: August 21, 2018 Report Publication Date: August 28, 2018 298 TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS _____________________________________________ 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY _______________________________________________________ 2 1.0 INTRODUCTION __________________________________________________________ 3 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES __________________________________________________ 3 1.2 LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS OF THE ASSESSMENT ______________________________________ 3 1.3 SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS ____________________________________________________ 3 1.4 METHODOLOGY USED _____________________________________________________________ 3 1.5 USER RELIANCE _________________________________________________________________ 4 2.0 SUBJECT PROPERTY AND VICINITY DESCRIPTION ____________________________ 5 2.1 GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION ________________________________________________________ 5 2.2 CURRENT USE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY _____________________________________________ 5 2.3 DESCRIPTION OF SITE STRUCTURES __________________________________________________ 5 2.4 SITE UTILITIES __________________________________________________________________ 5 2.5 CURRENT USE OF ADJOINING PROPERTIES _____________________________________________ 5 3.0 PHYSICAL SETTING ______________________________________________________ 6 3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY _____________________________________________________________ 6 3.2 REGIONAL HYDROGEOLOGY ________________________________________________________ 6 3.3 TOPOGRAPHY ___________________________________________________________________ 6 3.4 SOILS _________________________________________________________________________ 6 3.5 FLOODPLAIN ____________________________________________________________________ 6 3.6 WETLANDS _____________________________________________________________________ 6 4.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE __________________________________________________ 7 4.1 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND/OR PETROLEUM PRODUCTS ________________________________ 7 4.2 STORAGE TANKS ________________________________________________________________ 7 4.3 POLY-CHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCBS) ______________________________________________ 7 4.4 HEATING AND COOLING ____________________________________________________________ 7 4.5 STAINED SOIL/PAVEMENT AND/OR STRESSED VEGETATION _________________________________ 7 4.7 ODORS ________________________________________________________________________ 7 4.8 DRAINS AND/OR SUMPS ____________________________________________________________ 7 4.9 RAILROAD TRACKS _______________________________________________________________ 7 4.10 MONITORING WELLS _____________________________________________________________ 7 4.11 DISCARDED/SOLID WASTE MATERIAL ________________________________________________ 8 4.12 ADJOINING PROPERTIES __________________________________________________________ 8 5.0 REGULATORY RECORDS REVIEW __________________________________________ 9 5.1 FEDERAL DATABASE REVIEW _______________________________________________________ 9 5.2 STATE DATABASE REVIEW _________________________________________________________ 9 5.3 SUPPLEMENTARY DATABASE REVIEW _________________________________________________ 9 5.4 UNPLOTTABLE SUMMARY _________________________________________________________ 10 6.0 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION __________________________________________ 11 6.1 OWNERSHIP INFORMATION ________________________________________________________ 11 6.2 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS ___________________________________________________________ 11 6.3 HISTORICAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS ___________________________________________________ 11 6.4 ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN SEARCH _____________________________________________________ 11 6.5 PREVIOUS REPORTS _____________________________________________________________ 11 7.0 USER’S RESPONSIBILITIES _______________________________________________ 12 299 8.0 INTERVIEWS ____________________________________________________________ 13 9.0 CONCLUSIONS _________________________________________________________ 14 9.1 FINDINGS _____________________________________________________________________ 14 9.2 DATA GAPS ___________________________________________________________________ 14 9.3 OPINIONS AND ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATIONS ___________________________________________ 14 9.4 RECOMMENDATIONS _____________________________________________________________ 14 10.0 REFERENCES _________________________________________________________ 15 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 SITE MAPS APPENDIX 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION APPENDIX 3 SITE RECONNAISSANCE PHOTOGRAPHS APPENDIX 4 ERIS DATABASE REPORT APPENDIX 5 ERIS HISTORICAL AERIAL REPORT APPENDIX 6 ERIS TOPOGRAPHIC M AP RESEARCH RESULTS APPENDIX 7 THE ERIS ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN SEARCH REPORT APPENDIX 8 ASTM STANDARD E 2247-16 USER QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX 9 ASTM STANDARD E 2247-16 PROPERTY OWNER QUESTIONNAIRE 300 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 1 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in §312.10 of 40 CFR 312 and have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess the nature, history, and setting of a property. We have developed and performed the “all appropriate inquiries” in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312. Chase Farnsworth IV, CES John T. Russell, AIPG CPG Environmental Scientist II Senior Environmental Project Manager 301 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the request of Foxglove Solar, LLC (hereafter “the User”), and in accordance with 40 CFR Part 312 and ASTM Standard E 2247-16 (Standard Practice for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process for Forestland or Rural Property), Timmons Group conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of two (2) noncontiguous areas totaling approximately 406 acres located on Hites Road and Marlboro Road in Frederick County, Virginia (hereafter the “Subject Property” or “Site”). Based on our understanding, the Site is being evaluated for the construction of a solar farm. The assessment was performed to identify Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) on the Subject Property or adjoining properties based on a review of reasonably available environmental resource information and/or site observations. The assessment was also performed to allow the User to qualify for any landowner liability protections, including the Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser liability protection, available under federal and state law. RECs are defined by ASTM standards as “the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substance or petroleum products into structures or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water on the property.” Site Description The Subject Property is comprised of two (2) noncontiguous areas totaling approximately 406 acres located on Hites Road and Marlboro Road in Frederick County, Virginia. The Site primarily consists of cattle grazing land and agricultural land including orchards with some forested areas. Environmental Conditions on the Subject Property The results of the Phase I ESA did not identify any RECs in connection with the Subject Property, as defined by ASTM Standard E 2247-16. Environmental Conditions on Adjoining Properties The Subject Property is bordered to the north by Marlboro Road, private residences/farms, and agricultural land; to the east by agricultural land, private residences/farms, and Main Street (Route 11); to the south by agricultural land, private residences, forested areas, Clark Road, and Klines Mill Road; and to the west by agricultural land, private residences, forested areas, and Middle Road (Route 628). As a result of site inspection and a review of resource data, RECs were not identified for the adjoining properties as defined by ASTM Standard E 2247-16. Data Gaps No data gaps were encountered during the completion of the Phase I ESA. Conclusions and Recommended Response Actions Timmons Group conducted a Phase I ESA of two (2) noncontiguous areas totaling approximately 406 acres located on Hites Road and Marlboro Road in Frederick County, Virginia. No RECs were identified in connection with the Subject Property or adjoining properties; therefore, Timmons Group recommends no further assessment to satisfy due diligence requirements per ASTM Standard E 2247-16. 302 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Scope of Services This Phase I ESA was conducted in accordance with 40 CFR Part 312 and ASTM Standard E 2247-16. The assessment was performed to identify RECs based on a review of reasonably available environmental resource information and/or site observations that reveal evidence of a release or the threat of release of hazardous substances or petroleum products on or in the vicinity of the Site. The assessment was also performed to allow the Users to qualify for any landowner liability protections, including the Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser liability protection, available under federal and state law. RECs are defined by ASTM as “the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substance or petroleum products into structures or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water on the property.” The term includes “hazardous substances or petroleum products even under conditions in compliance with laws.” The term is not intended to include “de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material risk of harm to public health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate government agencies.” The purpose of this report is to provide the User with a Phase I ESA of two (2) noncontiguous areas totaling approximately 406 acres located on Hites Road and Marlboro Road in Frederick County, Virginia. The scope of work for preparing this assessment included: • reviewing reasonably available federal and state environmental regulatory records, • site reconnaissance, • interviews, • reviewing and evaluating reasonably available historical maps and data regarding the Subject Property and immediate vicinity, and • data evaluation and the completion of an ASTM Standard E 2247-16 Phase I ESA. 1.2 Limitations and Exceptions of the Assessment This report was prepared solely for the use of the User, their affiliated entities, affiliates, successors and/or assigns in accordance with the agreed upon scope of services. The conclusions provided in this report are based only on the information contained in this document. Additional information with respect to this Site or nearby sites, which was not available at the time this assessment was prepared, could modify the conclusions stated herein. This report has been prepared in accordance with ASTM Standard E 2247-16; no other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice provided under the terms of the agreement between the User and Timmons Group, as discussed below. Timmons Group was retained to complete a Phase I ESA to evaluate the presence of RECs and/or areas of potential environmental concern, either on-site or on the adjoining properties that could affect the environmental integrity of the Subject Property. Furthermore, this Phase I ESA is only valid up to 180 days prior to the date of acquisition. No estimates, plans or specifications, soil and/or groundwater testing, asbestos inspection, lead-based paint inspection, geotechnical or remedial recommendations or activities other than described herein were included under the scope of services. 1.3 Special Terms and Conditions No special terms or conditions were applied to the completion of this Phase I ESA. 1.4 Methodology Used This Phase I ESA was completed in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Standard E 2247-16. Timmons Group reviewed reasonably available federal and state environmental regulatory records, historical maps and data regarding the Subject Property and immediate vicinity. The User (i.e., 303 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 4 the party for whom this Phase I ESA was prepared), current landowner and government officials were contacted, as necessary, to obtain additional information pertaining to the Subject Property. Site reconnaissance was conducted by Timmons Group on August 21, 2018, to determine if any RECs and/or areas of potential environmental concern were present on the Subject Property. 1.5 User Reliance This Phase I ESA (the “Report”) was prepared exclusively for the User, their entities, affiliates successors and/or assigns, and reliance is accordingly extended to designated third parties. All limitations and conditions associated with the Report therefore remain in effect and transfer along with this authorization of reliance. Reliance is subject to the scope of work and the terms and conditions under which the Report was prepared for the User. 304 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 5 2.0 SUBJECT PROPERTY AND VICINITY DESCRIPTION 2.1 General Site Description The Subject Property is comprised of two (2) noncontiguous areas totaling approximately 406 acres located on Hites Road and Marlboro Road in Frederick County, Virginia (Appendix 1). Property details are included in Appendix 2. 2.2 Current Use of the Subject Property The Subject Property primarily consists of cattle grazing land and agricultural land including orchards with some forested areas. 2.3 Description of Site Structures While no structures are present in the western area of the Site, the eastern portion of the property includes a farm with two (2) barns and a dilapidated house off Vaucluse Road. Furthermore, two (2) small houses and three (3) large barns are present off Klines Mill Road. The barns are wood-frame with metal roofs while the houses are single-story built slab-on-grade with shingled roofs. 2.4 Site Utilities Overhead electric service is locally available to areas of the Subject Property. High-tension powerlines transect both properties on the Site. 2.5 Current Use of Adjoining Properties The Subject Property consists of two (2) areas, separated by: Hites Road, agricultural land, private residences, and some forestland. The table below details the properties that generally adjoin the Site. Adjoining Properties North: Marlboro Road, private residences/farms, and agricultural land East: Agricultural land, private residences/farms, and Main Street South: Agricultural land, private residences, forested areas, Clark Road, and Klines Mill Road West: Agricultural land, private residences, forested areas, and Middle Road 305 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 6 3.0 PHYSICAL SETTING 3.1 Regional Geology The Subject Property is located in the Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province. In general, the Valley and Ridge Province is underlain by sedimentary rocks that crop out in long, narrow belts or northeast trending ridges and valleys. Lithologically, the rocks are predominantly clastics and carbonates, and include sandstone, conglomerate, shale, siltstone, dolomite, and limestone (Seaber et al., 1988). The topography of this region is characterized by a sequence of ridges and valleys that are controlled by the structure and the weathering characteristics of the different lithologies. The ridges generally are underlain by folded/faulted resistant rocks such as sandstone, cherty limestone, dolomite, and conglomerate; the valleys are generally underlain by nonresistant rocks, such as limestone, shale and dolomite; the flanks generally are underlain by siltstone, shale or other rocks of intermediate resistance. Altitudes are commonly in the range of 200 to 500 meters above sea level, and local topographic relief seldom exceeds 200 meters (Seaber et al., 1988). With reference to the above, the 1993 Geologic Map of Virginia identifies the project site as being underlain by the Beekmantown Group (map label Ob) which is described as: dolomite, limestone, and chert. 3.2 Regional Hydrogeology The 2016 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Middletown, Virginia, 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle Map was reviewed to extrapolate groundwater characteristics in the area of the Subject Property based on topographical expressions (Appendix 1). Depending on location across the Subject Property, groundwater is anticipated to flow to either the east toward Meadow Brook or to the west toward Buffalo Marsh Run. 3.3 Topography According to the 2016/2013 USGS Middletown, Virginia, 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle Maps and visual observations, the topography of the Site is undulating with elevations ranging from approximately 760 feet above mean sea level (MSL) to approximately 860 feet above MSL (Appendix 1). 3.4 Soils The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey was utilized to detail the underlying soil units on the Subject Property. Mapping in Appendix 1 displays the soil layers of the Site (Appendix 1). 3.5 Floodplain The Federal Emergency Management Agency National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) was accessed and reviewed to determine if the Subject Property is located within a floodplain. Mapping in Appendix 1 displays the flood areas on and near the Site. 3.6 Wetlands The National Wetland Inventory map for the Subject Property was utilized to determine if wetland areas are present on the Subject Property. Mapping in Appendix 1 displays the wetland areas on the Site. 306 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 7 4.0 SITE RECONNAISANCE Chase Farnsworth IV of Timmons Group completed site reconnaissance on August 21, 2018, which included observing the Site boundaries and property interior to document existing conditions and identify RECs and/or areas of potential environmental concern associated with the Subject Property and/or adjoining properties. Photographs documenting the site inspection are included as Appendix 3. 4.1 Hazardous Substances and/or Petroleum Products No hazardous substances and/or petroleum products were observed on the Subject Property. 4.2 Storage Tanks No storage tanks were identified on the Subject Property. 4.3 Poly-Chlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Several pole-mounted electrical transformers are located in areas of the Subject Property that are not labeled with non-PCB placards. However, communication with Dominion Virginia Power has resulted in the conveyance that all company-owned transformers throughout the state, regardless of labeling, have been retrofitted with non-PCB dielectric fluid. Furthermore, the potential effected area from failure is expectedly minimal. Accordingly, the transformers do not represent RECs. 4.4 Heating and Cooling The residential structures on the Site are suspected to utilize propane and/or electricity for heating and cooling purposes; neither of which represent RECs. 4.5 Stained Soil/Pavement and/or Stressed Vegetation Stained soil/pavement and/or stressed vegetation were not observed on the Subject Property. 4.6 Pits, Ponds and/or Lagoons/Pools of Liquids A freshwater pond is present on the Subject Property which is utilized for watering the on-site cattle; the pond does not represent a REC. 4.7 Odors Strong, pungent, or noxious odors were not detected on the Subject Property. 4.8 Drains and/or Sumps Drains and/or sumps were not identified on the Subject Property. 4.9 Railroad Tracks Railroad tracks do not cross the Subject Property. 4.10 Wells Several wells are present on the Site for agricultural and residential purposes. Based on the proposed usage of the Site, the wells do not represent RECs. 307 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 8 4.11 Discarded/Solid Waste Material Moderate volumes of miscellaneous solid waste materials are present on the Site and primarily consist of farm materials and/or equipment, empty ASTs and 55-gallon drums, tires, bottles, cans, paper goods, and Styrofoam. Although some of the materials may have specific nonhazardous disposal requirements, the extent of the on-site material is considered a de minimis condition, which does not represent a potential risk to the Subject Property and is not considered a REC. 4.12 Adjoining Properties As a result of site reconnaissance and a review of resource data, the following environmental conditions were noted for the adjoining properties: • Hazardous Substances and/or Petroleum Products No hazardous substances and/or petroleum products were observed on the adjoining properties. • Storage Tanks No storage tanks were observed on the adjoining properties. • Poly-Chlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Several electrical transformers are located along the peripheral roadways. Per previous consultation with Dominion Power, all public utility transformers have been retrofitted with non-PCB dielectric fluid. Given the construction details in tandem with the area of potential effect from potential failure, the transformers do not represent RECs. • Stained Soil/Pavement and/or Stressed Vegetation No evidence of stained soil/pavement and/or stressed vegetation was observed on the adjoining properties. • Pits, Ponds and/or Lagoons/Pools of Liquid Several small agricultural ponds are present in the vicinity to the Site which do not represent RECs. • Odors Strong, pungent, or noxious odors were not found nor suspected to be emanating from the adjoining properties. • Drains and/or Sumps No drains or sumps were observed on the adjoining properties. • Railroad Tracks Railroad tracks were not observed on the adjoining properties. • Wells Groundwater supply wells are present on the adjoining properties. However, based on usage and/or distance in conjunction with proposed usage of the Subject Property, the wells do not represent RECs. • Discarded/Solid Waste Material Minimal to moderate volumes of miscellaneous solid waste materials are present on the adjoining properties and primarily consist of farm-use equipment, trucks, tractors, tires, and some miscellaneous debris. Although some of the materials may have specific nonhazardous disposal requirements, the extent of the material is considered a de minimis condition, which does not represent a potential risk to the Subject Property and is not considered a REC. 308 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 9 5.0 REGULATORY RECORDS REVIEW Timmons Group retained Environmental Risk Information Services (ERIS) to complete a computer regulatory database search to identify current and/or past uses of the Subject Property, and surrounding properties, that may have contributed to a release, or presents the material threat of a release, of hazardous materials or petroleum products, that has or may have environmentally impacted the Subject Property (Appendix 4). Timmons Group investigated the ASTM-required databases below along with the additional proprietary databases maintained by ERIS. Federal Databases Search Radius Government Publication Date NPL (National Priority List) 1 mile 07/03/2018 SEMS (Superfund Enterprise Management System) 0.5 mile 06/08/2018 SEMS-ARCHIVE (Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive) 0.5 mile 06/08/2018 RCRA CORRACTS (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act – Corrective Action Report) 1 mile 04/12/2018 RCRA-TSD (Treatment, Storage and Disposal) 0.5 mile 04/12/2018 RCRA-LQG/SQG (Large/Small Quantity Generators) 0.25 mile 04/12/2018 RCRA-CESQG (Certified Exempt Small Quantity Generators) 0.25 mile 04/12/2018 Federal Engineering Controls 0.5 mile 01/20/2016 Federal Institutional Controls 0.5 mile 01/20/2016 ERNS (Emergency Response Notification System) Subject Property Only 02/08/2017 Federal Brownfields 0.5 mile 02/20/2018 State Databases Search Radius Government Publication Date SWF/LF (Solid Waste Landfills) 0.5 mile 10/03/2017 LST (Leaking Petroleum Storage Tanks) 0.5 mile 04/18/2018 UST (Underground Storage Tanks) 0.25 mile 04/18/2018 AST (Aboveground Storage Tanks) 0.25 mile 04/18/2018 VRP (Voluntary Remediation Program) 0.5 mile 04/19/2018 5.1 Federal Database Review According to the ERIS Database Report, the Subject Property and adjoining properties are not listed on any of the reviewed federal databases (Appendix 4). 5.2 State Database Review According to the ERIS Database Report, the Subject Property is not listed on any of the reviewed state databases (Appendix 4). However, one (1) UST and one (1) AST listing are identified for an adjoining property. Regardless, based on topographic gradient, the listings do not represent RECs. 5.3 Supplementary Database Review According to the ERIS Database Report, the Subject Property and adjoining properties are not listed on the reviewed supplementary environmental databases (Appendix 4). 309 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 10 5.4 Unplottable Summary The ERIS Database Report did not identify any unplottable sites on or near the Subject Property (Appendix 4). Unplottable sites are facilities with inadequate address information to map correctly. 310 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 11 6.0 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION 6.1 Ownership Information Ownership information for the Subject Property is detailed in Appendix 2. 6.2 Aerial Photographs Historical aerial photographs were obtained from ERIS with Google Earth historical imagery also being utilized for further analysis of the Subject Property (Appendix 5). The Site has historically consisted of agricultural land, an orchard, and forested areas along with a couple of residences and farm buildings. No visible RECs were identified by the historical aerial imagery. The adjoining properties mainly consist of agricultural land, forested areas, and private residences or farms. No RECs were identified via historical imagery for the adjoining properties. 6.3 Historical Topographic Maps Historical topographic maps were obtained from ERIS (Appendix 6). The Site has historically consisted of agricultural land and forested areas along with several residences and farm structures. No visible RECs were identified by the historical aerial imagery. The adjoining properties mainly consist of forested areas, agricultural land, and private residences or farms. No RECs were identified via historical imagery for the adjoining properties. 6.4 Environmental Lien Search Per the ERIS, no environmental liens or activity and use limitations were identified for the Subject Property (Appendix 7). 6.5 Previous Reports Timmons Group was not provided with nor has any knowledge of any previous reports completed for the Subject Property. 311 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 12 7.0 USER’S RESPONSIBILITIES In order to qualify for Landowner Liability Protections under CERCLA, the User must provide certain information to the environmental professional pursuant to Section 6 of ASTM Standard E 2247-16 User Questionnaire. Failure to provide this information could result in the determination that the “all appropriate inquiry” is not complete and, therefore, the forfeiture of CERCLA protection. The ASTM Standard E 2247-16 User Questionnaire was provided by Jessica Berger of Urban Grid (Appendix 8), and the information recited in it is incorporated herein by reference. 312 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 13 8.0 INTERVIEWS The ASTM Standard E 2247-16 Current Property Owner Questionnaire for the Subject Property was completed by Mr. Harman Brumback. Mr. Brumback did not detail any information that compromises the environmental integrity of the Site (Appendix 9). Based on the history of the Subject Property as agricultural land and cattle grazing land in tandem with the results of the site reconnaissance and the regulatory database research, additional interviews with local officials were not pursued. 313 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 14 9.0 CONCLUSIONS 9.1 Findings Timmons Group has performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 2247-16 of two (2) noncontiguous areas totaling approximately 406 acres located on Hites Road and Marlboro Road in Frederick County, Virginia, the Subject Property. Based on our understanding, the Site is being evaluated for the construction of a solar farm. Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Sections 1.2 and 1.3 of this report. This assessment has revealed no RECs in connection to the Subject Property and adjoining properties. 9.2 Data Gaps No data gaps were encountered during the completion of the Phase I ESA. 9.3 Opinions and Additional Investigation Following a review of reasonably accessible state and federal environmental regulatory records, standard historical resources, site reconnaissance, and interviews, Timmons Group recommends no further investigation of the Subject Property to satisfy due diligence requirements as required by ASTM Standard E 2247-16. 9.4 Recommendations Timmons Group did not identify any RECs in connection with the Subject Property or adjoining properties and, therefore, recommends no further assessment to satisfy due diligence requirements per ASTM Standard E 2247-16. 314 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 15 10.0 REFERENCES • ASTM E 2247-16 Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. • Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Mines Minerals and Energy, 1993. Geologic Map of Virginia, 1:500,000 scale. • Environmental Risk Information Services Inc., March 1, 2018. Foxglove. Database Report. Report ID: 20180227028. • Environmental Risk Information Services Inc., August 9, 2018. Foxglove 2. Database Report. Report ID: 20180808184. • Environmental Risk Information Services Inc., February 27, 2018. Foxglove. Historical Aerial Report. Report ID: 20180227028. • Environmental Risk Information Services Inc., August 9, 2018. Foxglove 2. Historical Aerial Report. Report ID: 20180808184. • Environmental Risk Information Services Inc., March 2, 2018. Foxglove. The ERIS Environmental Lien Search Report. Report ID: 20180227028. • Environmental Risk Information Services Inc., August 10, 2018. Foxglove 2. The ERIS Environmental Lien Search Report. Report ID: 20180808184. • Environmental Risk Information Services Inc., February 27, 2018. Foxglove. Topographic Map Research Results. Report ID: 20180227028. • Environmental Risk Information Services Inc., August 9, 2018. Foxglove 2. Topographic Map Research Results. Report ID: 20180808184. • Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2018. National Flood Hazard Layer, Flood Insurance Rate Map, Frederick County, Virginia. • Legrand, H.E., 1988. Region 21, Piedmont and Blue Ridge, in Back, W., Rosenshein, J.S., and Seaber, P.R., eds., Hydrogeology: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America, v. O-2. • USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, 2018. Web Soil Survey 3.0, National Cooperative Soil Survey, Frederick County, Virginia. • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, 2018. Frederick County, Virginia. • U.S. Geological Survey, 2016. 7.5 Minute Series, Middletown, Virginia, Topographic Quadrangle Map, 1:24000 scale. • U.S. Geological Survey, 2013. 7.5 Minute Series, Middletown, Virginia, Topographic Quadrangle Map, 1:24000 scale. 315 Foxglove Solar – Phase I ESA Project No. 41147 Page 16 APPENDICES Appendix 1 Site Maps Appendix 2 Property Information Appendix 3 Site Reconnaissance Photographs Appendix 4 ERIS Database Report Appendix 5 ERIS Historical Aerial Report Appendix 6 ERIS Topographic Map Research Results Appendix 7 The ERIS Environmental Lien Search Report Appendix 8 ASTM Standard E 2247-16 User Questionnaire Appendix 9 ASTM Standard E 2247-16 Property Owner Questionnaire 316 APPENDIX 1 Site Maps 317 U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE(S): DATE(S): WATERSHED(S): HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE(S): TIMMONS GROUP JOB NUMBER: PROJECT STUDY LIMITS: LATITUDE: LONGITUDE: FOXGLOVE SOLAR SITEFREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIAFIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP 41147 39.084214 -78.279810 557.4 ACRES MIDDLETOWN 2016 02070006 NORTH FORK SHENANDOAH These plans and associated documents are the exclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of TIMMONS GROUP. Path: Y:\804\99999 - Urban_Grid\41147-Foxglove-Fredrick County\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-VIC.mxd 5 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000Feet Site limits are approximate. Topographic imagery from USGS. Site Limits 318 DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE 1 OF 2 DATE 08/07/2018 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME L. MAJOR FOXGLOVE SOLAR Hit e s R d MarlboroRd M i d d l e R d Ge m D r O a k H i l l D r Ge r m a n y R d Car s o n L n Tuc k a h o e L n Clark Rd 14C 32C 17E 31B 14D 14D 16D 16C 32C 6C 16C 16C 14B 6C 14D 32C 14B 14D 14C 16D 32B 14C 6C 32C 32C 14C 16C 17C 17E 7C 6C 32B 14B 6C 40B 14D 17E 32C 5C 31B 7C 29 16C 16C 32C 14C 14C 14C 32B 17C 32B 31B 17E 32B 14D 6C 17E 16C 14B 7C 14B 14B 14B 29 7C 7C 17C 14D 14D 14D 14B 6C 40B 32B 17E 32C 7C 1 " = 350 'H: ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY MAP REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION These plans and associated documents are the exclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of TIMMONS GROUP. PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , VI R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE0350700 SCALE (FEET) Y:\840\41147 - Foxglove_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-EIM.mxd NOTES: Project Limits are approximate. NWI from US Fish and Wildlife Service. Soils data from SSURGO. National Hydrography Dataset from USGS. Aerial imagery from VGIN. 1 2 Legend Project Study Limits - 557.4 Acres National Hydrography Dataset National Wetlands Inventory Hydric Soil Rating Hydric - Not Present Non-Hydric Mapunit Symbol Mapunit Name 29 Massanetta loam 14B Frederick-Poplimento loams, 2 to 7 percent slopes 14C Frederick-Poplimento loams, 7 to 15 percent slopes 14D Frederick-Poplimento loams, 15 to 25 percent slopes 16C Frederick-Poplimento loams, very rocky, 7 to 15 percent slopes 16D Frederick-Poplimento loams, very rocky, 15 to 25 percent slopes 17E Frederick-Poplimento-Rock outcrop complex, 15 to 45 percent slopes 31B Nicholson silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 32B Oaklet silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 32C Oaklet silt loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes 40B Timberville silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 5C Carbo silt loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes 6C Carbo-Oaklet silt loams, very rocky, 2 to 15 percent slopes 7C Carbo-Oaklet-Rock outcrop complex, 2 to 15 percent slopes W Water North Fork Shenandoah Soils 319 DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE 2 OF 2 DATE 08/07/2018 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME L. MAJOR FOXGLOVE SOLAR D a r te r jo D r Hi t e s R d Klines M i l l R d Vaucluse R d V a u c l u s e S p r i n g L n S t r o s n i de r L n We s t e r n v i e w D r Cla r k R d 7C 7C 17E 32C 6C 32C 34 31B 7C 14B 31B 32C 6C 6C 31B 6C 14D 6C 32C 32C 7C 32B 17E 6C 32B 6C 7C 6C 32B 32B 7C 40B 6C 32C 14C 32C 32B 32B 32B 32B 6C 32C 32B 6C 6C 31B 6C 31B 6C 6C 32C 34 14B 32C 5B W 14D 32B 6C 17E 7C 14C 32C 14C 5B 7C 32B 1 " = 350 'H: ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY MAP REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION These plans and associated documents are the exclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of TIMMONS GROUP. PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , VI R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE0350700 SCALE (FEET) Y:\840\41147 - Foxglove_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-EIM.mxd NOTES: Project Limits are approximate. NWI from US Fish and Wildlife Service. Soils data from SSURGO. National Hydrography Dataset from USGS. Aerial imagery from VGIN. 1 2 Legend Project Study Limits - 557.4 Acres National Hydrography Dataset National Wetlands Inventory Hydric Soil Rating Hydric - Not Present Non-Hydric Mapunit Symbol Mapunit Name 29 Massanetta loam 14B Frederick-Poplimento loams, 2 to 7 percent slopes 14C Frederick-Poplimento loams, 7 to 15 percent slopes 14D Frederick-Poplimento loams, 15 to 25 percent slopes 16C Frederick-Poplimento loams, very rocky, 7 to 15 percent slopes 16D Frederick-Poplimento loams, very rocky, 15 to 25 percent slopes 17E Frederick-Poplimento-Rock outcrop complex, 15 to 45 percent slopes 31B Nicholson silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 32B Oaklet silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 32C Oaklet silt loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes 40B Timberville silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 5C Carbo silt loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes 6C Carbo-Oaklet silt loams, very rocky, 2 to 15 percent slopes 7C Carbo-Oaklet-Rock outcrop complex, 2 to 15 percent slopes W Water North Fork Shenandoah Soils 320 APPENDIX 2 Property Information 321 8/8/2018 Property Record Card https://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/applications/PropertyCards/2211720180808143036.htm 1/4 Property Identification Card Frederick County Property Information (Map#: 73 A 21) Owner: WOODBINE FARMS INC Owner Address: 510 BARLEY LN WINCHESTER, VA 22602 2710 Total Land Area: 271.00 Acres *Land Use Value* $85,600 Property Address: 911 Address Not on File Legal Description(s): 271.00 ACRES FMP-2015 Zoned: RA Prior Assessment: $900,300 Magisterial District: BACK CREEK Deed Bk/Pg: 307 / 588 Remarks: POWERLINE Assessment Values (Map#: 73 A 21) Building 1: Land Value: $901,100 Other Improvements: Total Value:$901,100 Acreage Description (Map#: 73 A 21) Size In Acres: 271.00 Description: Lump Sum or Per Acre: Per Acre 322 8/8/2018 Property Record Card https://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/applications/PropertyCards/2211720180808143036.htm 2/4 Unit Value: 3,500 Adjustment Percentage: -0.05 Utility Value: Acreage Value: $901,075 Size In Acres: Description: Lump Sum or Per Acre: Lump Sum Unit Value: Adjustment Percentage: 0.00 Utility Value: Acreage Value: Size In Acres: Description: Lump Sum or Per Acre: Lump Sum Unit Value: 332,215 Adjustment Percentage: 0.00 Utility Value: Acreage Value: $332,215 Area:0 Unit: Rate:0.00 Value: Total Value:$901,075 Other Improvements (Map#: 73 A 21) TOTAL VALUE: Sales Information (Map#: 73 A 21) Sales Date: 0/0/0 Sales Price: Instrument: Deed Bk/Pg: 307 / 588 Grantor: Not On File # of Parcels: Transaction History (Map#: 73 A 21) Building Information (Map#: 73 A 21)323 8/8/2018 Property Record Card https://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/applications/PropertyCards/2211720180808143036.htm 3/4 Building 1: EXTERIOR INFORMATION Year Built: 0 Occupancy Type: VACANT LAND Condition: None Foundation: None Exterior Walls: None Roofing: None Roof Type: None Garage: Number of Cars: None Built-In No. Cars: None Carport: None INTERIOR INFORMATION Story Height: 0.00 Number or Rooms: None Number or Bedrooms: None Number or Full Baths: None Number or Half Baths: None Building Sq. Feet: Basement Sq. Feet: Fin. Basement Sq. Feet: None Heating: A/C: SITE INFORMATION Zoning Type: RA Terrain Type: ON Character: ROLLING/SLOPING Right of Way: PUBLIC Easements: PAVED Water: NONE Sewer: NONE Electric: NO Gas: NO Fuel Type: None Utility Value: 0 Fireplace: None Stk Fireplace: None Flues: None Metal Flues: None Stacked Flues: None Inop. Flue/FP: None 324 2/20/2018 Property Record Card https://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/applications/PropertyCards/2484520180220145600.htm 1/5 Property Identification Card Frederick County Property Information (Map#: 84 A 29) Owner: WOODBINE FARMS INC Owner Addr ess: 510 BARLEY LN WINCHESTER, VA 22602 2710 Total Land Ar ea: 106.46 Acres *Land Use Value* $144,463 Property Addr ess: 718 KLINES MILL RD Legal Description(s): 106.46 ACRES FMP-2015 Zoned: RA Prior Assessment: $604,500 Magisterial District: BACK CREEK Deed Bk/Pg: 386 / 511 Remarks: 2 MH'S CLMD ON PP GOOD RD FRTG Assessment Values (Map#: 84 A 29) Building 1: $40- Land Value: $577,100 Other Impr ovements: $33,240 Total Value:$610,300 Acreage Description (Map#: 84 A 29) Size In Acr es: 1.00 Description: Homesite Lump Sum or Per Acr e: Lump Sum Unit Value: 8,500 Adjustment Per centage: 0.00 Utility Value: 60,000 Acreage Value: $68,500 Size In Acr es: 1.00 Description: Homesite Lump Sum or Per Acr e: Lump Sum Unit Value: 8,500 Adjustment Per centage: 0.00 325 2/20/2018 Property Record Card https://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/applications/PropertyCards/2484520180220145600.htm 2/5 Utility Value: 30,000 Acreage Value: $38,500 Size In Acr es: Description: Lump Sum or Per Acr e: Lump Sum Unit Value: 8,500 Adjustment Per centage: 0.00 Utility Value: 30,000 Acreage Value: $38,500 Size In Acr es: 104.46 Description: Lump Sum or Per Acr e: Per Acre Unit Value: Adjustment Per centage: 0.00 Utility Value: 4,500 Acreage Value: $470,070 Area:0 Unit: Rate:0.00 Value: Total Value:$577,070 Other Improvements (Map#: 84 A 29) Description: BARN Total Squar e Feet: 2,240 Impr ovement Value: $8,960 Description: POLE SHED Total Squar e Feet: 3,840 Impr ovement Value: $13,440 Description: GARAGE-FRAME Total Squar e Feet: N/A Impr ovement Value: $500 Description: FENCE-CHAIN LINK Total Squar e Feet: N/A Impr ovement Value: No Value Description: LEAN-TO Total Squar e Feet: 1,536 Impr ovement Value: $3,840 Description: SHEDS Total Squar e Feet: N/A Impr ovement Value: $1,000 Description: SWMH Total Squar e Feet: 672 Impr ovement Value: No Value Description: SWMH Total Squar e Feet: 1,056 Impr ovement Value: No Value Description: ATTCH TO MH'S 326 2/20/2018 Property Record Card https://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/applications/PropertyCards/2484520180220145600.htm 3/5 Total Squar e Feet: N/A Impr ovement Value: $5,500 TOTAL VALUE: $33,240 Sales Information (Map#: 84 A 29) Sales Date: 0/0/0 Sales Price: $70,000 Instrument: Deed Bk/Pg: 386 / 511 Grantor: Not On File # of Par cels: Transaction History (Map#: 84 A 29) Building Information (Map#: 84 A 29) Building 1: EXTERIOR INFORMA TION Year Built: 0 Occupancy T ype: VAC- W/MOB HOM Condition: None Foundation: None Exterior W alls: None Roofing: None Roof Type: None Garage: Number of Cars: None Built-In No. Cars: None Carport: None INTERIOR INFORMA TION Story Height: 0.00 Number or Rooms: None Number or Bedr ooms: None Number or Full Baths: None Number or Half Baths: None Building Sq. Feet: Basement Sq. Feet: Fin. Basement Sq. Feet: None Heating: NONE A/C: NONE SITE INFORMA TION Zoning Type: RA Terrain T ype: ON Character: ROLLING/SLOPING Right of Way: PUBLIC Easements: PAVED Water: WELL Sewer: SEPTIC Electric: YES Gas: NO Fuel Type: None Utility Value: 17000 Fireplace:None 327 2/20/2018 Property Record Card https://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/applications/PropertyCards/2484520180220145600.htm 4/5 Stk Fir eplace: None Flues: None Metal Flues: None Stacked Flues: None Inop. Flue/FP: None 328 2/20/2018 Property Record Card https://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/applications/PropertyCards/2487120180220145450.htm 1/4 Property Identification Card Frederick County Property Information (Map#: 84 A 50) Owner: WOODBINE FARMS INC Owner Addr ess: 510 BARLEY LN WINCHESTER, VA 22602 2710 Total Land Ar ea: 197.00 Acres *Land Use Value* $140,875 Property Addr ess: 829 VAUCLUSE RD Legal Description(s): 197.00 ACRES FMP-2015 Zoned: RA Prior Assessment: $902,500 Magisterial District: BACK CREEK Deed Bk/Pg: 307 / 588 Remarks: DWL IS BOARDED UP 5/16 T Assessment Values (Map#: 84 A 50) Building 1: $24,340 Land Value: $872,100 Other Impr ovements: $14,060 Total Value:$910,500 Acreage Description (Map#: 84 A 50) Size In Acr es: 1.00 Description: Homesite Lump Sum or Per Acr e: Lump Sum Unit Value: 8,500 Adjustment Per centage: 0.00 Utility Value: 60,000 Acreage Value: $68,500 Size In Acr es: 196.00 Description: Lump Sum or Per Acr e: Per Acre Unit Value: Adjustment Per centage: 0.00 Utility Value: 4,100 329 2/20/2018 Property Record Card https://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/applications/PropertyCards/2487120180220145450.htm 2/4 Acreage Value: $803,600 Size In Acr es: Description: Lump Sum or Per Acr e: Lump Sum Unit Value: Adjustment Per centage: 0.00 Utility Value: Acreage Value: Size In Acr es: Description: Lump Sum or Per Acr e: Lump Sum Unit Value: Adjustment Per centage: 0.00 Utility Value: 60,705 Acreage Value: $60,705 Size In Acr es: Description: Lump Sum or Per Acr e: Lump Sum Unit Value: Adjustment Per centage: 0.00 Utility Value: Acreage Value: Area:0 Unit: Rate:0.00 Value: Total Value:$872,100 Other Improvements (Map#: 84 A 50) Description: BARN Total Squar e Feet: 3,960 Impr ovement Value: $9,900 Description: POLE SHED Total Squar e Feet: 4,160 Impr ovement Value: $4,160 TOTAL VALUE: $14,060 Sales Information (Map#: 84 A 50) Sales Date: 0/0/0 Sales Price: Instrument: Deed Bk/Pg: 307 / 588 Grantor: Not On File # of Par cels: Transaction History (Map#: 84 A 50) 330 2/20/2018 Property Record Card https://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/applications/PropertyCards/2487120180220145450.htm 3/4 Building Information (Map#: 84 A 50) Building 1: EXTERIOR INFORMA TION Year Built: 1900 Occupancy T ype: DWELLING Condition: POOR Foundation: ROCK Exterior W alls: VINYL Roofing: METAL Roof Type: GABLE Garage: NONE Number of Cars: None Built-In No. Cars: None Carport: NONE INTERIOR INFORMA TION Story Height: 2.00 Number or Rooms: 6 Number or Bedr ooms: 3 Number or Full Baths: 1 Number or Half Baths: None Building Sq. Feet: 1652 Basement Sq. Feet: None Fin. Basement Sq. Feet: None Interior W alls: PLASTER Floors: WOOD Heating: BASEBOARD A/C: NO SITE INFORMA TION Zoning Type: RA Terrain T ype: ON Character: ROLLING/SLOPING Right of Way: PUBLIC Easements: PAVED Water: WELL Sewer: SEPTIC Electric: YES Gas: NO Fuel Type: ELECTRIC Utility Value: 8500 Fireplace: None Stk Fir eplace: None Flues: 1 Metal Flues: None Stacked Flues: None Inop. Flue/FP: None 331 2/20/2018 Property Record Card https://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/applications/PropertyCards/2487120180220145450.htm 4/4 Building 1 Sketch 15.9 +----------------------------+ : : : : : : : : : 15 : : : : 23 : : : : : 17.9 : +--------------------------------+ : : : : : : : : : 4 13.9 +------+ : : : 6 : :B : +-------------------------300--------------------------++ : : : : : : : : : : 15.9 15.9 : : : : : : : : :A : +C----6--------------24----30---------------+-----------+ : : : : 7.9 7.9 : : 332 APPENDIX 3 Site Reconnaissance Photographs 333 P h a s e I E S A – F o x g l o v e S o u t h e a s t e r n v i e w f r o m t h e n o r t h e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h e w e s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e S o u t h e r n v i e w f r o m t h e n o r t h e r n a r e a o f t h e w e s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e W e s t e r n v i e w f r o m t h e n o r t h e r n a r e a o f t h e w e s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e S o u t h e a s t e r n v i e w f r o m t h e n o r t h e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e N o r t h e r n v i e w f r o m t h e n o r t h e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e O l d h o u s e n e a r t h e n o r t h e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e 334 P h a s e I E S A – F o x g l o v e B a r n i n t h e n o r t h e r n a r e a o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e B a r n i n t h e n o r t h e r n a r e a o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e W e s t e r n v i e w f r o m t h e n o r t h e r n a r e a o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e S o u t h e r n v i e w f r o m t h e n o r t h e r n a r e a o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e P o n d u s e d b y c a t t l e i n t h e n o r t h - c e n t r a l a r e a o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e E a s t e r n v i e w f r o m t h e w e s t e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e 335 P h a s e I E S A – F o x g l o v e N o r t h e r n v i e w f r o m t h e s o u t h e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e N o r t h e r n v i e w o f a h o u s e a n d b a r n s n e a r t h e s o u t h e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e B a r n a n d a p p l e s c r a t e s n e a r t h e s o u t h e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e B a r n n e a r t h e s o u t h e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e W a t e r t a n k a l o n g t h e b a r n i n t h e p r e v i o u s p h o t o E m p t y A S T s i n t h e b a r n i n t h e p r e v i o u s p h o t o 336 P h a s e I E S A – F o x g l o v e E m p t y d r u m s i n t h e b a r n i n t h e p r e v i o u s p h o t o B a r n n e a r t h e s o u t h e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e N o r t h e r n v i e w f r o m t h e s o u t h e r n a r e a o f t h e e a s t e r n p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i t e 337 APPENDIX 4 ERIS Database Report 338 Project Property:Foxglove 2 Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Project No:41147 Report Type:Database Report Order No: 20180808184 Requested by:Timmons Group, Inc. Date Completed: August 9, 2018 339 2 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 h-Table of Contents Notice:IMPORTANT LIMITATIONS and YOUR LIABILITY Reliance on information in Report:This report DOES NOT replace a full Phase I Environmental Site Assessment but is solely intended to be used as database review of environmental records. License for use of information in Report:No page of this report can be used without this cover page, this notice and the project property identifier. The information in Report(s) may not be modified or re-sold. Your Liability for misuse:Using this Service and/or its reports in a manner contrary to this Notice or your agreement will be in breach of copyright and contract and ERIS may obtain damages for such mis-use, including damages caused to third parties, and gives ERIS the right to terminate your account, rescind your license to any previous reports and to bar you from future use of the Service. No warranty of Accuracy or Liability for ERIS:The information contained in this report has been produced by ERIS Information Inc. ("ERIS") using various sources of information, including information provided by Federal and State government departments. The report applies only to the address and up to the date specified on the cover of this report, and any alterations or deviation from this description will require a new report. This report and the data contained herein does not purport to be and does not constitute a guarantee of the accuracy of the information contained herein and does not constitute a legal opinion nor medical advice. Although ERIS has endeavored to present you with information that is accurate, ERIS disclaims, any and all liability for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in such information and data, whether attributable to inadvertence, negligence or otherwise, and for any consequences arising therefrom. Liability on the part of ERIS is limited to the monetary value paid for this report. Trademark and Copyright:You may not use the ERIS trademarks or attribute any work to ERIS other than as outlined above. This Service and Report(s) are protected by copyright owned by ERIS Information Inc. Copyright in data used in the Service or Report(s) (the "Data") is owned by ERIS or its licensors. The Service, Report(s) and Data may not be copied or reproduced in whole or in any substantial part without prior written consent of ERIS. Table of Contents Table of Contents...........................................................................................2 Executive Summary........................................................................................3 Executive Summary: Report Summary.......................................................................................................................4 Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property...................................................................................7 Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties........................................................................8 Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source.........................................................................................................9 Map...............................................................................................................10 Aerial.............................................................................................................13 Topographic Map..........................................................................................14 Detail Report.................................................................................................15 Unplottable Summary...................................................................................16 Unplottable Report........................................................................................17 Appendix: Database Descriptions.................................................................18 Definitions.....................................................................................................26 340 3 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 h-Executive Summary Property Information: Project Property:Foxglove 2 Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Project No:41147 Coordinates: Latitude:39.081094 Longitude:-78.280389 UTM Northing:4,329,296.91 UTM Easting:735,245.12 UTM Zone:UTM Zone 17S Elevation:829 FT Order Information: Order No:20180808184 Date Requested:August 8, 2018 Requested by:Timmons Group, Inc. Report Type:Database Report Historicals/Products: Executive Summary 341 4 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 h-Executive Summary: Report Summary Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total Standard Environmental Records Federal rr-NPL-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-PROPOSED NPL-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-DELETED NPL-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SEMS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-ODI-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SEMS ARCHIVE-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CERCLIS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-IODI-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CERCLIS NFRAP-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CERCLIS LIENS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-RCRA CORRACTS-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-RCRA TSD-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-RCRA LQG-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-RCRA SQG-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-RCRA CESQG-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-RCRA NON GEN-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-FED ENG-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-FED INST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-ERNS 1982 TO 1986-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-ERNS 1987 TO 1989-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-ERNS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FED BROWNFIELDS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-FEMA UST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-SEMS LIEN-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-SUPERFUND ROD-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 State rr-SWF/LF-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 NPL PROPOSED NPL DELETED NPL SEMS ODI SEMS ARCHIVE CERCLIS IODI CERCLIS NFRAP CERCLIS LIENS RCRA CORRACTS RCRA TSD RCRA LQG RCRA SQG RCRA CESQG RCRA NON GEN FED ENG FED INST ERNS 1982 TO 1986 ERNS 1987 TO 1989 ERNS FED BROWNFIELDS FEMA UST SEMS LIEN SUPERFUND ROD SWF/LF Executive Summary: Report Summary 342 5 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total rr-LST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DELISTED LST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-UST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-AST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED TANK-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-INST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-VRP-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-BROWNFIELDS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 Tribal rr-INDIAN LUST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-INDIAN UST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED ILST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DELISTED IUST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 County No County standard environmental record sources available for this State. Additional Environmental Records Federal rr-FINDS/FRS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-TRIS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HMIRS-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-NCDL-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-TSCA-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-HIST TSCA-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-FTTS ADMIN-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FTTS INSP-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-PRP-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-SCRD DRYCLEANER-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-ICIS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FED DRYCLEANERS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED FED DRY-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-FUDS-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-MLTS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HIST MLTS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-MINES-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-ALT FUELS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-SSTS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-PCB-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 State rr-SPILLS-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 LST DELISTED LST UST AST DELISTED TANK INST VRP BROWNFIELDS INDIAN LUST INDIAN UST DELISTED ILST DELISTED IUST FINDS/FRS TRIS HMIRS NCDL TSCA HIST TSCA FTTS ADMIN FTTS INSP PRP SCRD DRYCLEANER ICIS FED DRYCLEANERS DELISTED FED DRY FUDS MLTS HIST MLTS MINES ALT FUELS SSTS PCB SPILLS 343 6 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total rr-PC SPILLS-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-DRYCLEANERS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 Tribal No Tribal additional environmental record sources available for this State. County No County additional environmental record sources available for this State. Total:0 0 0 0 0 0 * PO – Property Only * 'Property and adjoining properties' database search radii are set at 0.25 miles. PC SPILLS DRYCLEANERS 344 7 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 h-Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number No records found in the selected databases for the project property. Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property 345 8 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 h-Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number No records found in the selected databases for the surrounding properties. Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties 346 9 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 h-Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source No records found in the selected databases for the project property or surrounding properties. Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source 347 B u f f a l o M a r s h R u n M e a d o w B r o o k W a t s o n R u n Fa w c e t t R u n 78°15'30"W78°16'W78°16'30"W78°17'W78°17'30"W78°18'W78°18'30"W 39 ° 6 ' N 39 ° 6 ' N 39 ° 5 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 5 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 0.4 0 0.40.2 Miles Order No: 20180808184 Map : 1 Mile Radius 1:26200 Address: Marlboro Road, Back Creek, VA Source: © 2016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. Project Property Buffer Outline #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation # * Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unknown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ramps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State Boundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation Areas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield Areas State Superfund Areas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund Areas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/administered areas) 348 B u f f a l o M a r s h R u n M e a d o w B r o o k Watso n R u n 78°16'W78°16'30"W78°17'W78°17'30"W 39 ° 5 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 5 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 4 ' N 0.25 0 0.250.125 Miles Order No: 20180808184 Map : 0.5 Mile Radius 1:17400 Address: Marlboro Road, Back Creek, VA Source: © 2016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. Project Property Buffer Outline #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation # * Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unknown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ramps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State Boundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation Areas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield Areas State Superfund Areas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund Areas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/administered areas) 349 B u f f a l o M a r s h R u n Hite s R d Cl a r k R d Midd l e R d Marlboro Rd Vau c l u s e R d Tuc k a h o e L n Buff a l o M a r s h R d G e r m a n y R d G e m D r 78°16'W78°16'30"W78°17'W78°17'30"W 39 ° 5 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 5 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 0.2 0 0.20.1 Miles Order No: 20180808184 Map : 0.25 Mile Radius 1:12900 Address: Marlboro Road, Back Creek, VA Source: © 2016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. Project Property Buffer Outline #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation # * Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unknown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ramps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State Boundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation Areas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield Areas State Superfund Areas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund Areas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/administered areas) 350 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community 78°16'30"W78°17'W 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 0.1 0 0.10.05 Miles Order No: 20180808184Aerial 1:7900 Address: Marlboro Road, Back Creek, VA © ERIS Information Inc.Source: ESRI World Imagery (2015) 351 78°15'30"W78°16'W78°16'30"W78°17'W78°17'30"W78°18'W 39 ° 6 ' N 39 ° 6 ' N 39 ° 5 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 5 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 0.35 0 0.350.175 Miles Order No: 20180808184Topographic Map 1:24000 Address: Marlboro Road, Back Creek, VA © ERIS Information Inc.Source: USGS Topographic Map (2016) Quadrangle(s): Middletown, VA 352 15 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 h-Detail Report Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB No records found in the selected databases for the project property or surrounding properties. Detail Report 353 16 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 h-Unplottable Summary Total: 0 Unplottable sites DB Company Name/Site Name Address City Zip ERIS ID No unplottable records were found that may be relevant for the search criteria. Unplottable Summary 354 17 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 h-Unplottable Report No unplottable records were found that may be relevant for the search criteria. Unplottable Report 355 18 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 h-Appendix: Database Descriptions Environmental Risk Information Services (ERIS) can search the following databases. The extent of historical information varies with each database and current information is determined by what is publicly available to ERIS at the time of update. ERIS updates databases as set out in ASTM Standard E1527-13, Section 8.1.8 Sources of Standard Source Information: "Government information from nongovernmental sources may be considered current if the source updates the information at least every 90 days, or, for information that is updated less frequently than quarterly by the government agency, within 90 days of the date the government agency makes the information available to the public." Standard Environmental Record Sources Federal National Priority List:rr-NPL-bb National Priorities List (Superfund)-NPL: EPA's (United States Environmental Protection Agency) list of the most serious uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites identified for possible long-term remedial action under the Superfund program. The NPL, which EPA is required to update at least once a year, is based primarily on the score a site receives from EPA's Hazard Ranking System. A site must be on the NPL to receive money from the Superfund Trust Fund for remedial action. Government Publication Date: Jul 3, 2018 National Priority List - Proposed:rr-PROPOSED NPL-bb Includes sites proposed (by the EPA, the state, or concerned citizens) for addition to the NPL due to contamination by hazardous waste and identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a candidate for cleanup because it poses a risk to human health and/or the environment. Government Publication Date: Jul 3, 2018 Deleted NPL:rr-DELETED NPL-bb The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. Government Publication Date: Jul 3, 2018 SEMS List 8R Active Site Inventory:rr-SEMS-bb The Superfund Program has deployed the Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS), which integrates multiple legacy systems into a comprehensive tracking and reporting tool. This inventory contains active sites evaluated by the Superfund program that are either proposed to be or are on the National Priorities List (NPL) as well as sites that are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. The Active Site Inventory Report displays site and location information at active SEMS sites. An active site is one at which site assessment, removal, remedial, enforcement, cost recovery, or oversight activities are being planned or conducted. Government Publication Date: Jun 8, 2018 Inventory of Open Dumps, June 1985:rr-ODI-bb The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) provides for publication of an inventory of open dumps. The Act defines "open dumps" as facilities which do not comply with EPA's "Criteria for Classification of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and Practices" (40 CFR 257). Government Publication Date: Jun 1985 SEMS List 8R Archive Sites:rr-SEMS ARCHIVE-bb The Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) Archived Site Inventory displays site and location information at sites archived from SEMS. An archived site is one at which EPA has determined that assessment has been completed and no further remedial action is planned under the Superfund program at this time. Government Publication Date: Jun 8, 2018 NPL PROPOSED NPL DELETED NPL SEMS ODI SEMS ARCHIVE Appendix: Database Descriptions 356 19 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System - CERCLIS: rr-CERCLIS-bb Superfund is a program administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to locate, investigate, and clean up the worst hazardous waste sites throughout the United States. CERCLIS is a database of potential and confirmed hazardous waste sites at which the EPA Superfund program has some involvement. It contains sites that are either proposed to be or are on the National Priorities List (NPL) as well as sites that are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. The EPA administers the Superfund program in cooperation with individual states and tribal governments; this database is made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Oct 25, 2013 EPA Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands:rr-IODI-bb Public Law 103-399, The Indian Lands Open Dump Cleanup Act of 1994, enacted October 22, 1994, identified congressional concerns that solid waste open dump sites located on American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) lands threaten the health and safety of residents of those lands and contiguous areas. The purpose of the Act is to identify the location of open dumps on Indian lands, assess the relative health and environment hazards posed by those sites, and provide financial and technical assistance to Indian tribal governments to close such dumps in compliance with Federal standards and regulations or standards promulgated by Indian Tribal governments or Alaska Native entities. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 1998 CERCLIS - No Further Remedial Action Planned:rr-CERCLIS NFRAP-bb An archived site is one at which EPA has determined that assessment has been completed and no further remedial action is planned under the Superfund program at this time. The Archive designation means that, to the best of EPA's knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL). This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that, based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site. Government Publication Date: Oct 25, 2013 CERCLIS Liens:rr-CERCLIS LIENS-bb A Federal Superfund lien exists at any property where EPA has incurred Superfund costs to address contamination ("Superfund site") and has provided notice of liability to the property owner. A Federal CERCLA ("Superfund") lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent Superfund monies. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Jan 30, 2014 RCRA CORRACTS-Corrective Action:rr-RCRA CORRACTS-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. At these sites, the Corrective Action Program ensures that cleanups occur. EPA and state regulators work with facilities and communities to design remedies based on the contamination, geology, and anticipated use unique to each site. Government Publication Date: Apr 12, 2018 RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD Facilities:rr-RCRA TSD-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. This database includes Non-Corrective Action sites listed as treatment, storage and/or disposal facilities of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Government Publication Date: Apr 12, 2018 RCRA Generator List:rr-RCRA LQG-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Large Quantity Generators (LQGs) generate 1,000 kilograms per month or more of hazardous waste or more than one kilogram per month of acutely hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Apr 12, 2018 RCRA Small Quantity Generators List:rr-RCRA SQG-bb RCRA Info is the EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Small Quantity Generators (SQGs) generate more than 100 kilograms, but less than 1,000 kilograms, of hazardous waste per month. Government Publication Date: Apr 12, 2018 CERCLIS IODI CERCLIS NFRAP CERCLIS LIENS RCRA CORRACTS RCRA TSD RCRA LQG RCRA SQG 357 20 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 RCRA Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators List:rr-RCRA CESQG-bb RCRA Info is the EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQG) generate 100 kilograms or less per month of hazardous waste or one kilogram or less per month of acutely hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Apr 12, 2018 RCRA Non-Generators:rr-RCRA NON GEN-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Apr 12, 2018 Federal Engineering Controls-ECs:rr-FED ENG-bb Engineering controls (ECs) encompass a variety of engineered and constructed physical barriers (e.g., soil capping, sub-surface venting systems, mitigation barriers, fences) to contain and/or prevent exposure to contamination on a property. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Jan 20, 2016 Federal Institutional Controls- ICs:rr-FED INST-bb Institutional controls are non-engineered instruments, such as administrative and legal controls, that help minimize the potential for human exposure to contamination and/or protect the integrity of the remedy. Although it is EPA's (United States Environmental Protection Agency ) expectation that treatment or engineering controls will be used to address principal threat wastes and that groundwater will be returned to its beneficial use whenever practicable, ICs play an important role in site remedies because they reduce exposure to contamination by limiting land or resource use and guide human behavior at a site. Government Publication Date: Jan 20, 2016 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS 1982 TO 1986-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. Government Publication Date: 1982-1986 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS 1987 TO 1989-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. Government Publication Date: 1987-1989 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Feb 8, 2017 The Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) Brownfield Database:rr-FED BROWNFIELDS-bb Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Cleaning up and reinvesting in these properties protects the environment, reduces blight, and takes development pressures off greenspaces and working lands. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Feb 20, 2018 FEMA Underground Storage Tank Listing:rr-FEMA UST-bb The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security maintains a list of FEMA owned underground storage tanks. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2017 RCRA CESQG RCRA NON GEN FED ENG FED INST ERNS 1982 TO 1986 ERNS 1987 TO 1989 ERNS FED BROWNFIELDS FEMA UST 358 21 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 LIEN on Property:rr-SEMS LIEN-bb The EPA Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) provides LIEN information on properties under the EPA Superfund Program. Government Publication Date: Jun 8, 2018 Superfund Decision Documents:rr-SUPERFUND ROD-bb This database contains a listing of decision documents for Superfund sites. Decision documents serve to provide the reasoning for the choice of (or) changes to a Superfund Site cleanup plan. The decision documents include Records of Decision (ROD), ROD Amendments, Explanations of Significant Differences (ESD), along with other associated memos and files. This information is maintained and made available by the US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Government Publication Date: Apr 11, 2018 State Solid Waste Landfills:rr-SWF/LF-bb The solid waste program in the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is designed to encourage the reuse and recycling of solid waste and to regulate the disposal and treatment of solid waste, including regulated medical waste, and to ensure that hazardous waste is properly managed. Standards are designed to protect human health and the environment and driven by regulatory requirements. Government Publication Date: Oct 3, 2017 Leaking Petroleum Storage Tanks:rr-LST-bb When a release occurs from an aboveground or underground storage tank, the owner and/or operator of the tank is required to report the release to the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). This database contains a listing of releases from tanks both above and underground. Government Publication Date: Apr 18, 2018 Delisted Leaking Petroleum Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED LST-bb Facilities which have been removed from the list of leaking petroleum storage tanks made available by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Facilities may be removed from the lists of leaking petroleum tanks when it is determined that the release reported is not an actual release, or the released substance is not petroleum - these sites may still have endured non-petroleum hazardous substance releases. Government Publication Date: Apr 18, 2018 Underground Storage Tanks:rr-UST-bb A listing of registered underground storage tanks. This list is maintained by The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: Apr 18, 2018 Aboveground Storage Tanks:rr-AST-bb A listing of registered aboveground storage tanks. This list is maintained by The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: Apr 18, 2018 Delisted Tanks:rr-DELISTED TANK-bb Facilities which have been removed from the list of registered aboveground and/or underground storage tanks made available by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Facilities may be removed from the lists of registered tanks when it is determined that the tank does not require registration, for example, due to capacity or contents. Government Publication Date: Apr 18, 2018 Institutional Controls:rr-INST-bb Institutional controls are legal or contractual restrictions on property use that remain effective after remediation is completed and are used to satisfy remediation levels. This list is maintained by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: Apr 19, 2018 Voluntary Remediation Program:rr-VRP-bb The Voluntary Remediation Program is to encourage hazardous substance cleanups that might not otherwise take place. The program is a streamlined mechanism for site owners or operators to voluntarily address contamination at sites with concurrence from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: Apr 19, 2018 SEMS LIEN SUPERFUND ROD SWF/LF LST DELISTED LST UST AST DELISTED TANK INST VRP 359 22 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 Brownfields Site Specific Assessments:rr-BROWNFIELDS-bb Brownfields are idled, underutilized, or abandoned industrial or commercial properties where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination. Examples include factories, railyards, landfills, dry cleaners, etc. This list is maintained by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: Feb 27, 2018 Tribal Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs) on Tribal/Indian Lands:rr-INDIAN LUST-bb Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs) on Tribal/Indian Lands in EPA Region 3, which includes Virginia. There are no LUST records in Virginia at this time. Government Publication Date: May 4, 2018 Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) on Indian Lands:rr-INDIAN UST-bb Listing of Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) on Tribal/Indian Lands in EPA Region 3, which includes Virginia. There are no UST records in Virginia at this time. Government Publication Date: May 4, 2018 Delisted Tribal Leaking Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED ILST-bb Leaking Underground Storage Tank facilities which have been removed from the Regional Tribal LUST lists made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Oct 14, 2017 Delisted Tribal Underground Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED IUST-bb Underground Storage Tank facilities which have been removed from the Regional Tribal UST lists made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Oct 14, 2017 County No County standard environmental record sources available for this State. Additional Environmental Record Sources Federal Facility Registry Service/Facility Index:rr-FINDS/FRS-bb The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s Facility Registry System (FRS) is a centrally managed database that identifies facilities, sites or places subject to environmental regulations or of environmental interest. FRS creates high-quality, accurate, and authoritative facility identification records through rigorous verification and management procedures that incorporate information from program national systems, state master facility records, data collected from EPA's Central Data Exchange registrations and data management personnel. Government Publication Date: Apr 17, 2018 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program:rr-TRIS-bb The EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) is a database containing data on disposal or other releases of over 650 toxic chemicals from thousands of U.S. facilities and information about how facilities manage those chemicals through recycling, energy recovery, and treatment. One of TRI's primary purposes is to inform communities about toxic chemical releases to the environment. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2016 Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System:rr-HMIRS-bb US DOT - Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) Incidents Reports Database taken from Hazmat Intelligence Portal, U.S. Department of Transportation. Government Publication Date: May 23, 2018 National Clandestine Drug Labs:rr-NCDL-bb BROWNFIELDS INDIAN LUST INDIAN UST DELISTED ILST DELISTED IUST FINDS/FRS TRIS HMIRS NCDL 360 23 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this data as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Government Publication Date: Dec 21, 2017 Toxic Substances Control Act:rr-TSCA-bb The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 8(a) Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) rule and changing its name to the Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule. The CDR enables EPA to collect and publish information on the manufacturing, processing, and use of commercial chemical substances and mixtures (referred to hereafter as chemical substances) on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory (TSCA Inventory). This includes current information on chemical substance production volumes, manufacturing sites, and how the chemical substances are used. This information helps the Agency determine whether people or the environment are potentially exposed to reported chemical substances. EPA publishes submitted CDR data that is not Confidential Business Information (CBI). Government Publication Date: Jun 30, 2017 Hist TSCA:rr-HIST TSCA-bb The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 8(a) Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) rule and changing its name to the Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule. The 2006 IUR data summary report includes information about chemicals manufactured or imported in quantities of 25,000 pounds or more at a single site during calendar year 2005. In addition to the basic manufacturing information collected in previous reporting cycles, the 2006 cycle is the first time EPA collected information to characterize exposure during manufacturing, processing and use of organic chemicals. The 2006 cycle also is the first time manufacturers of inorganic chemicals were required to report basic manufacturing information. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2006 FTTS Administrative Case Listing:rr-FTTS ADMIN-bb An administrative case listing from the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), together known as FTTS. This database was obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Compliance Database (NCDB). The FTTS and NCDB was shut down in 2006. Government Publication Date: Jan 19, 2007 FTTS Inspection Case Listing:rr-FTTS INSP-bb An inspection case listing from the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), together known as FTTS. This database was obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Compliance Database (NCDB). The FTTS and NCDB was shut down in 2006. Government Publication Date: Jan 19, 2007 Potentially Responsible Parties List:rr-PRP-bb Early in the cleanup process, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducts a search to find the potentially responsible parties (PRPs). EPA looks for evidence to determine liability by matching wastes found at the site with parties that may have contributed wastes to the site. Government Publication Date: Oct 10, 2017 State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing:rr-SCRD DRYCLEANER-bb The State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners (SCRD) was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. Coalition members are states with mandated programs and funding for drycleaner site remediation. Current members are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. Government Publication Date: Nov 08, 2017 Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS):rr-ICIS-bb The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) is a system that provides information for the Federal Enforcement and Compliance (FE&C) and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs. The FE&C component supports the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Civil Enforcement and Compliance program activities. These activities include Compliance Assistance, Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement. The NPDES program supports tracking of NPDES permits, limits, discharge monitoring data and other program reports. Government Publication Date: Nov 18, 2016 Drycleaner Facilities:rr-FED DRYCLEANERS-bb A list of drycleaner facilities from the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tracks facilities that possess NAIC and SIC codes that classify businesses as drycleaner establishments. Government Publication Date: Sep 14, 2016 TSCA HIST TSCA FTTS ADMIN FTTS INSP PRP SCRD DRYCLEANER ICIS FED DRYCLEANERS 361 24 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 Delisted Drycleaner Facilities:rr-DELISTED FED DRY-bb List of sites removed from the list of Drycleaner Facilities (sites in the EPA's Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) with NAIC or SIC codes identifying the business as a drycleaner establishment). Government Publication Date: Sep 14, 2016 Formerly Used Defense Sites:rr-FUDS-bb Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) are properties that were formerly owned by, leased to, or otherwise possessed by and under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense prior to October 1986, where the Department of Defense (DoD) is responsible for an environmental restoration. This list is published by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Government Publication Date: Nov 22, 2016 Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS):rr-MLTS-bb A list of sites that store radioactive material subject to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing requirements. This list is maintained by the NRC. As of September 2016, the NRC no longer releases location information for sites. Site locations were last received in July 2016. Government Publication Date: Jun 30, 2017 Historic Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS) sites:rr-HIST MLTS-bb A historic list of sites that have inactive licenses and/or removed from the Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS). In some cases, a site is removed from the MLTS when the state becomes an "Agreement State". An Agreement State is a State that has signed an agreement with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) authorizing the State to regulate certain uses of radioactive materials within the State. Government Publication Date: Jan 31, 2010 Mines Master Index File:rr-MINES-bb The Master Index File (MIF) contains mine identification numbers issued by the Department of Labor Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) for mines active or opened since 1971. Note that addresses may or may not correspond with the physical location of the mine itself. Government Publication Date: Jan 30, 2018 Alternative Fueling Stations:rr-ALT FUELS-bb List of alternative fueling stations made available by the US Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. Includes Biodiesel stations, Ethanol (E85) stations, Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Propane) stations, Ethanol (E85) stations, Natural Gas stations, Hydrogen stations, and Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE). The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) obtains information about new stations from trade media, Clean Cities coordinators, a Submit New Station form on the Station Locator website, and through collaborating with infrastructure equipment and fuel providers, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), and industry groups. Government Publication Date: Apr 25, 2018 Registered Pesticide Establishments:rr-SSTS-bb List of active EPA-registered foreign and domestic pesticide-producing and device-producing establishments based on data from the Section Seven Tracking System (SSTS). The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Section 7 requires that facilities producing pesticides, active ingredients, or devices be registered. The list of establishments is made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Mar 1, 2018 Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Notifiers:rr-PCB-bb Facilities included in the national list of facilities that have notified the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) activities. Any company or person storing, transporting or disposing of PCBs or conducting PCB research and development must notify the EPA and receive an identification number. Government Publication Date: Nov 30, 2017 State Spills:rr-SPILLS-bb The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Pollution Response Program (PREP), provides for responses to air, water and waste pollution incidents in order to protect human health and the environment. PREP staff often work to assist local emergency responders, other state agencies, federal agencies, and responsible parties, as may be needed, to manage pollution incidents. Oil spills, fish kills, and hazardous materials spills are examples of incidents that may involve the DEQ's PREP Program. Government Publication Date: May 1, 2018 DELISTED FED DRY FUDS MLTS HIST MLTS MINES ALT FUELS SSTS PCB SPILLS 362 25 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 Pollution Complaint:rr-PC SPILLS-bb The database contains a listing of Pollution Complaints from 1986 to 1994 that include petroleum releases and other releases on state land and waters. This list is maintained by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: 1986-1994 Drycleaners List:rr-DRYCLEANERS-bb A listing of registered drycleaners maintained by the Department of Environmental Quality. Government Publication Date: May 31, 2018 Tribal No Tribal additional environmental record sources available for this State. County No County additional environmental record sources available for this State. PC SPILLS DRYCLEANERS 363 26 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180808184 h-Definitions Database Descriptions:This section provides a detailed explanation for each database including: source, information available, time coverage, and acronyms used. They are listed in alphabetic order. Detail Report:This is the section of the report which provides the most detail for each individual record. Records are summarized by location, starting with the project property followed by records in closest proximity. Distance:The distance value is the distance between plotted points, not necessarily the distance between the sites' boundaries. All values are an approximation. Direction: The direction value is the compass direction of the site in respect to the project property and/or center point of the report. Elevation:The elevation value is taken from the location at which the records for the site address have been plotted. All values are an approximation. Source: Google Elevation API. Executive Summary:This portion of the report is divided into 3 sections: 'Report Summary'- Displays a chart indicating how many records fall on the project property and, within the report search radii. 'Site Report Summary'-Project Property'- This section lists all the records which fall on the project property. For more details, see the 'Detail Report' section. 'Site Report Summary-Surrounding Properties'- This section summarizes all records on adjacent properties, listing them in order of proximity from the project property. For more details, see the 'Detail Report' section. Map Key:The map key number is assigned according to closest proximity from the project property. Map Key numbers always start at #1. The project property will always have a map key of '1' if records are available. If there is a number in brackets beside the main number, this will indicate the number of records on that specific property. If there is no number in brackets, there is only one record for that property. The symbol and colour used indicates 'elevation': the red inverted triangle will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Lower Elevation', the yellow triangle will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Higher Elevation' and the orange square will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Same Elevation.' Unplottables:These are records that could not be mapped due to various reasons, including limited geographic information. These records may or may not be in your study area, and are included as reference. Definitions 364 Project Property:Foxglove Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Project No:41147 W03 Report Type:Database Report Order No: 20180227028 Requested by:Timmons Group, Inc. Date Completed: March 1, 2018 365 2 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 h-Table of Contents Notice:IMPORTANT LIMITATIONS and YOUR LIABILITY Reliance on information in Report:This report DOES NOT replace a full Phase I Environmental Site Assessment but is solely intended to be used as database review of environmental records. License for use of information in Report:No page of this report can be used without this cover page, this notice and the project property identifier. The information in Report(s) may not be modified or re-sold. Your Liability for misuse:Using this Service and/or its reports in a manner contrary to this Notice or your agreement will be in breach of copyright and contract and ERIS may obtain damages for such mis-use, including damages caused to third parties, and gives ERIS the right to terminate your account, rescind your license to any previous reports and to bar you from future use of the Service. No warranty of Accuracy or Liability for ERIS:The information contained in this report has been produced by ERIS Information Inc. ("ERIS") using various sources of information, including information provided by Federal and State government departments. The report applies only to the address and up to the date specified on the cover of this report, and any alterations or deviation from this description will require a new report. This report and the data contained herein does not purport to be and does not constitute a guarantee of the accuracy of the information contained herein and does not constitute a legal opinion nor medical advice. Although ERIS has endeavored to present you with information that is accurate, ERIS disclaims, any and all liability for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in such information and data, whether attributable to inadvertence, negligence or otherwise, and for any consequences arising therefrom. Liability on the part of ERIS is limited to the monetary value paid for this report. Trademark and Copyright:You may not use the ERIS trademarks or attribute any work to ERIS other than as outlined above. This Service and Report(s) are protected by copyright owned by ERIS Information Inc. Copyright in data used in the Service or Report(s) (the "Data") is owned by ERIS or its licensors. The Service, Report(s) and Data may not be copied or reproduced in whole or in any substantial part without prior written consent of ERIS. Table of Contents Table of Contents...........................................................................................2 Executive Summary........................................................................................3 Executive Summary: Report Summary.......................................................................................................................4 Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property...................................................................................7 Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties........................................................................8 Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source.........................................................................................................9 Map...............................................................................................................10 Aerial.............................................................................................................13 Topographic Map..........................................................................................14 Detail Report.................................................................................................15 Unplottable Summary...................................................................................19 Unplottable Report........................................................................................20 Appendix: Database Descriptions.................................................................21 Definitions.....................................................................................................29 366 3 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 h-Executive Summary Property Information: Project Property:Foxglove Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Project No:41147 W03 Coordinates: Latitude:39.065496 Longitude:-78.270539 UTM Northing:4,327,591.11 UTM Easting:736,149.37 UTM Zone:UTM Zone 17S Elevation:822 FT Order Information: Order No:20180227028 Date Requested:February 27, 2018 Requested by:Timmons Group, Inc. Report Type:Database Report Historicals/Products: Executive Summary 367 4 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 h-Executive Summary: Report Summary Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total Standard Environmental Records Federal rr-NPL-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-PROPOSED NPL-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-DELETED NPL-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SEMS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SEMS ARCHIVE-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CERCLIS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CERCLIS NFRAP-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CERCLIS LIENS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-RCRA CORRACTS-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-RCRA TSD-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-RCRA LQG-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-RCRA SQG-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-RCRA CESQG-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-RCRA NON GEN-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-FED ENG-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-FED INST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-ERNS 1982 TO 1986-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-ERNS 1987 TO 1989-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-ERNS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FED BROWNFIELDS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-FEMA UST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-SEMS LIEN-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 State rr-SWF/LF-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-LST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DELISTED LST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-UST-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-AST-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 NPL PROPOSED NPL DELETED NPL SEMS SEMS ARCHIVE CERCLIS CERCLIS NFRAP CERCLIS LIENS RCRA CORRACTS RCRA TSD RCRA LQG RCRA SQG RCRA CESQG RCRA NON GEN FED ENG FED INST ERNS 1982 TO 1986 ERNS 1987 TO 1989 ERNS FED BROWNFIELDS FEMA UST SEMS LIEN SWF/LF LST DELISTED LST UST AST Executive Summary: Report Summary 368 5 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total rr-DELISTED TANK-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-INST CONTROL-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-VRP-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-BROWNFIELDS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 Tribal rr-INDIAN LUST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-INDIAN UST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED ILST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DELISTED IUST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 County No County standard environmental record sources available for this State. Additional Environmental Records Federal rr-FINDS/FRS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-TRIS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HMIRS-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-NCDL-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-ODI-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-IODI-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-TSCA-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-HIST TSCA-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-FTTS ADMIN-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FTTS INSP-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-PRP-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-SCRD DRYCLEANER-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-ICIS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FED DRYCLEANERS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED FED DRY-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-FUDS-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-MLTS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HIST MLTS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-MINES-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-ALT FUELS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-SUPERFUND ROD-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-SSTS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-PCB-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 State rr-SPILLS-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-PC SPILLS-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 DELISTED TANK INST CONTROL VRP BROWNFIELDS INDIAN LUST INDIAN UST DELISTED ILST DELISTED IUST FINDS/FRS TRIS HMIRS NCDL ODI IODI TSCA HIST TSCA FTTS ADMIN FTTS INSP PRP SCRD DRYCLEANER ICIS FED DRYCLEANERS DELISTED FED DRY FUDS MLTS HIST MLTS MINES ALT FUELS SUPERFUND ROD SSTS PCB SPILLS PC SPILLS 369 6 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total rr-DRYCLEANERS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 Tribal No Tribal additional environmental record sources available for this State. County No County additional environmental record sources available for this State. Total:0 0 2 0 0 2 * PO – Property Only * 'Property and adjoining properties' database search radii are set at 0.25 miles. DRYCLEANERS 370 7 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 h-Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number No records found in the selected databases for the project property. Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property 371 8 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 h-Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number m1d dd-AST-811801561-aa ALLEGHENY POWER MEADOWBROOK SUBSTATION Rt 638 Vaucluse Rd Stephens City VA 22655 E 0.13 / 686.25 -74 p1p-15-811801561-x1x Facility ID | Facility Active? | Active ASTs | Inactive ASTs: 6026240 | Yes | 1 | 0 Tank No | Tank Status: 1A | CURR IN USE m1d dd-UST-811825445-aa ALLEGHENY POWER MEADOWBROOK SUBSTATION Rt 638 Vaucluse Rd Stephens City VA 22655 E 0.13 / 686.25 -74 p1p-16-811825445-x1x Facility ID | Facility Active | Active UST | Inactive UST: 6026240 | Yes | 0 | 1 Tank No | Tank Status: 1 | REM FROM GRD 15 16 1 1 AST UST Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties 372 9 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 h-Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source Standard State UST - Underground Storage Tanks A search of the UST database, dated Feb 6, 2018 has found that there are 1 UST site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Lower Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key ALLEGHENY POWER MEADOWBROOK SUBSTATION Rt 638 Vaucluse Rd Stephens City VA 22655 E 0.13 / 686.25 m-1-811825445-a Facility ID | Facility Active | Active UST | Inactive UST: 6026240 | Yes | 0 | 1 Tank No | Tank Status: 1 | REM FROM GRD AST - Aboveground Storage Tanks A search of the AST database, dated Feb 6, 2018 has found that there are 1 AST site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Lower Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key ALLEGHENY POWER MEADOWBROOK SUBSTATION Rt 638 Vaucluse Rd Stephens City VA 22655 E 0.13 / 686.25 m-1-811801561-a Facility ID | Facility Active? | Active ASTs | Inactive ASTs: 6026240 | Yes | 1 | 0 Tank No | Tank Status: 1A | CURR IN USE 1 1 Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source 373 # * m1c(2) M e a d o w B r o o k W a t s o n R u n B u f f a l o M a r s h R u n W e st R u n M i d d l e M a r s h B r o o k I-81 S I-81 N Vall e y P i k e 78°14'30"W78°15'W78°15'30"W78°16'W78°16'30"W78°17'W78°17'30"W78°18'W 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 3 ' N 39 ° 3 ' N 39 ° 2 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 2 ' 3 0 " N 0.45 0 0.450.225 Miles Order No: 20180227028 Map : 1 Mile Radius 1:28300 Address: Hites Road, Middletown, Va, Middletown, VA Source: © 2016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. Project Property Buffer Outline #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation # * Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unknown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ramps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State Boundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation Areas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield Areas State Superfund Areas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund Areas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/administered areas) 1 (2) 374 # * m1c(2) M e a d o w B r o o k W a t s o n R u n M i d d l e M a r s h B r o o k Val l e y P i k e 78°15'W78°15'30"W78°16'W78°16'30"W78°17'W 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 3 ' N 39 ° 3 ' N 0.3 0 0.30.15 Miles Order No: 20180227028 Map : 0.5 Mile Radius 1:19500 Address: Hites Road, Middletown, Va, Middletown, VA Source: © 2016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. Project Property Buffer Outline #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation # * Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unknown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ramps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State Boundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation Areas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield Areas State Superfund Areas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund Areas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/administered areas) 1 (2) 375 # * m1c(2) M e a d o w B r o o k W a t s o n R u n M i d d l e M ar s h B r o o k V a l l e y P i k e 78°15'30"W78°16'W78°16'30"W78°17'W 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 0.2 0 0.20.1 Miles Order No: 20180227028 Map : 0.25 Mile Radius 1:15000 Address: Hites Road, Middletown, Va, Middletown, VA Source: © 2016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. Project Property Buffer Outline #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation # * Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unknown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ramps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State Boundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation Areas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield Areas State Superfund Areas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund Areas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/administered areas) 1 (2) 376 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community 78°15'30"W78°16'W78°16'30"W 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 0.1 0 0.10.05 Miles Order No: 20180227028Aerial 1:9800 Address: Hites Road, Middletown, Va, Middletown, VA © ERIS Information Inc.Source: ESRI World Imagery (2015) 377 78°14'30"W78°15'W78°15'30"W78°16'W78°16'30"W78°17'W78°17'30"W 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 5 ' N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 4 ' N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 3 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 3 ' N 39 ° 3 ' N 39 ° 2 ' 3 0 " N 39 ° 2 ' 3 0 " N 0.35 0 0.350.175 Miles Order No: 20180227028Topographic Map 1:24000 Address: Hites Road, Middletown, Va, Middletown, VA © ERIS Information Inc.Source: USGS Topographic Map (2013) Quadrangle(s): Stephens City, VA; Middletown, VA; 378 15 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 h-Detail Report Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-1-811801561-b 1 of 2 E 0.13 / 686.25 747.51 / -74 ALLEGHENY POWER MEADOWBROOK SUBSTATION Rt 638 Vaucluse Rd Stephens City VA 22655 dd-AST-811801561-bb p1p-811801561-y1y Facility ID:6026240 Region:VRO CEDS Facility ID:200000070425 Parent Region:Valley Facility Active?:Yes Facility Addr 1:Rt 638 Vaucluse Rd Fed Regulated?:Yes Facility Addr 2: Active USTs:0 Facility City:Stephens City Inactive USTs:1 Facility Location:Route 11 & 638 Active ASTs:1 County:Frederick County Inactive ASTs:0 State:VA Facility Type:UTILITY Latitude:39.0605340688 Facility Name:ALLEGHENY POWER MEADOWBROOK SUBSTATION Longitude:-78.2514980578 Tank Details Tank Owner ID:36831 Install Date:1/18/2006 Tank No:1A Date Closed: Tank Status:CURR IN USE Capacity:1000 Tank Type:AST Contents:DIESEL Fed Regulated Tank:N Other Contents: Tank Materials Tank Mat Bare Steel AST:No Tank Mat Insulated Steel:No Tank Mat Concrete Coated:No Tank Mat Unknown:No Tank Mat Other:Yes Tank Mat Other Specify:Steel W/Concrete Tank Type Cathodic/CP:No Tank Type Single Wall:No Tank Type Double Wall:Yes Tank Type Lined Interior:No Tank Type Double Bottom:No Tank Type Portable/Skid:No Tank Type Fabricated/Built:No Tank Type Vault Below Grade:No Tank Type Vertical:No Tank Type Horizontal:No Tank Type Unknown:N Tank Type Other:No Tank Type Other Specify: Note: Tank Foundation Concrete Coating:No Concrete:Yes Steel/Sad/Run/Beam:No Earthen:No Ring Wall:No Unknown:No 1 AST Detail Report 379 16 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Other:No Other Specify: Roof NA Horiz Tank:No Roof Floating:No Roof Fix Concrete:No Roof Other:Yes Roof Other Specify:Horizontal Note: Tank Containment Curbing:No Weirs/Boom:No Sorbent Material:No Culverts/Gutters:No Diversion Pool:No Retention Pond:No Dike/Berm/Wall:No Unknown:No Cont Type None:No Cont Type Other:No Tank RD GW Monitor:No Tnk RD Visual Mntr:No Tank RD Vapor Mntr:No Tnk RD Inter Mntr:No Tank RD None AST:No Tank RD Other AST:No RPB Double Bottom:No RPB Double Wall:No RPB Polyeth Jacket:No RPB Dike/Berm Exc:No RPB None:No RPB Unknown:No RPB Other:No Cont Type Other Specify: Tank RD Other Specify: RPB Other Specify: Note: Owner Tank Owner ID:36831 No of Active AST:1 No of Active UST:0 No of Inactive AST:0 No of Inactive UST:1 Federal Regulated:Y Region:VRO Name:ALLEGHENY POWER MEADOWBROOK SUBSTATION Owner Name:The Potomac Edison Company Owner Address 1:800 Cabin Hill Dr Owner Address 2: Owner City:Greensburg Owner State:PA Owner Zip 5:15601 Owner Zip 4:1689 Owner Type:COMMERCIAL m-1-811825445-b 2 of 2 E 0.13 / 686.25 747.51 / -74 ALLEGHENY POWER MEADOWBROOK SUBSTATION Rt 638 Vaucluse Rd Stephens City VA 22655 dd-UST-811825445-bb p1p-811825445-y1y Facility ID:6026240 Region:VRO CEDS Facility ID:200000070425 Parent Region:Valley Facility Active:Yes Facility Addr 1:Rt 638 Vaucluse Rd 1 UST 380 17 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Federally Regulated:Yes Facility Addr 2: Active UST:0 City:Stephens City Inactive UST:1 Facility Location:Route 11 & 638 Active AST:1 County:Frederick County Inactive AST:0 State:VA Facility Type:UTILITY Latitude:39.0605340688 Facility Name:ALLEGHENY POWER MEADOWBROOK SUBSTATION Longitude:-78.2514980578 Tank Details Tank Owner ID:36831 Install Date:7/1/1991 Tank No:1 Date Closed:1/17/2006 Tank Status:REM FROM GRD Capacity:1000 Tank Type:UST Contents:EMER GENERATOR Fed Regulated Tank:Y Other Contents: Tank Materials Asphalt/Bare Steel:No Impressed Current:No CCP/STI-P3:Yes Polyethyl Jacket:No Composite:Yes Concrete:No Fiberglass:No Excavation Liner:No Lined Interior:No Secondary Contain:No Double Walled:Yes Repaired:No Other:No Unknown:No Other Specify:STIP3 Note: Pipe Materials Piping Type:NO VALVE: SUCTION Double Walled:Yes Asphalt/Bare Steel:No Polyflexible:No Galvanized Steel:No Unknown:No Fiberglass:No Secondary Contain:Yes Copper:Yes Other:No Cathodic Protected:No Other Specify: Repaired:No Note: Impressed Current: Tank/Pipe Release Detection Manual Gauging:No Overfill Spec: Tank RD Tight Test:No Pipe RD MTG:No Inventory Controls:No Pipe RD ATG: Tank RD ATG:No Pipe RD GW Monitor:No Tank RD Vapor Mntr:No Pipe RD Vapor Mntr:No Tank RD GW Monitor:No Pipe IM Dbl Wall:Yes Tnk RD IM Dbl Wall:Yes Pipe IM Sec Cont:No Tnk RD IM Sec Cont:No Pipe RD ALLD:No Tank RD SIR:No Pipe RD Tight Test:No Tank RD Leak Defer:No Pipe RD SIR:No Tank RD Other:No Pipe RD Leak Defer: Tank RD Other Spec:Pipe RD Other:No Spl Device Install:Yes Pipe RD Other Spec: Overfill Dev Inst:Yes Note: Overfill Type: Owner Tank Owner ID:36831 Owner Name:The Potomac Edison Company No of Active AST:1 Owner Address 1:800 Cabin Hill Dr No of Active UST:0 Owner Address 2: No of Inactive AST:0 Owner City:Greensburg 381 18 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB No of Inactive UST:1 Owner State:PA Federal Regulated:Y Owner Zip 5:15601 Region:VRO Owner Zip 4:1689 Name:ALLEGHENY POWER MEADOWBROOK SUBSTATION Owner Type:COMMERCIAL 382 19 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 h-Unplottable Summary Total: 0 Unplottable sites DB Company Name/Site Name Address City Zip ERIS ID No unplottable records were found that may be relevant for the search criteria. Unplottable Summary 383 20 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 h-Unplottable Report No unplottable records were found that may be relevant for the search criteria. Unplottable Report 384 21 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 h-Appendix: Database Descriptions Environmental Risk Information Services (ERIS) can search the following databases. The extent of historical information varies with each database and current information is determined by what is publicly available to ERIS at the time of update. ERIS updates databases as set out in ASTM Standard E1527-13, Section 8.1.8 Sources of Standard Source Information: "Government information from nongovernmental sources may be considered current if the source updates the information at least every 90 days, or, for information that is updated less frequently than quarterly by the government agency, within 90 days of the date the government agency makes the information available to the public." Standard Environmental Record Sources Federal National Priority List:rr-NPL-bb National Priorities List (Superfund)-NPL: EPA's (United States Environmental Protection Agency) list of the most serious uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites identified for possible long-term remedial action under the Superfund program. The NPL, which EPA is required to update at least once a year, is based primarily on the score a site receives from EPA's Hazard Ranking System. A site must be on the NPL to receive money from the Superfund Trust Fund for remedial action. Government Publication Date: Feb 6, 2018 National Priority List - Proposed:rr-PROPOSED NPL-bb Includes sites proposed (by the EPA, the state, or concerned citizens) for addition to the NPL due to contamination by hazardous waste and identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a candidate for cleanup because it poses a risk to human health and/or the environment. Government Publication Date: Feb 6, 2018 Deleted NPL:rr-DELETED NPL-bb The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. Government Publication Date: Feb 6, 2018 SEMS List 8R Active Site Inventory:rr-SEMS-bb The Superfund Program has deployed the Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS), which integrates multiple legacy systems into a comprehensive tracking and reporting tool. This inventory contains active sites evaluated by the Superfund program that are either proposed to be or are on the National Priorities List (NPL) as well as sites that are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. The Active Site Inventory Report displays site and location information at active SEMS sites. An active site is one at which site assessment, removal, remedial, enforcement, cost recovery, or oversight activities are being planned or conducted. Government Publication Date: Dec 11, 2017 SEMS List 8R Archive Sites:rr-SEMS ARCHIVE-bb The Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) Archived Site Inventory displays site and location information at sites archived from SEMS. An archived site is one at which EPA has determined that assessment has been completed and no further remedial action is planned under the Superfund program at this time. Government Publication Date: Dec 11, 2017 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System - CERCLIS: rr-CERCLIS-bb Superfund is a program administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to locate, investigate, and clean up the worst hazardous waste sites throughout the United States. CERCLIS is a database of potential and confirmed hazardous waste sites at which the EPA Superfund program has some involvement. It contains sites that are either proposed to be or are on the National Priorities List (NPL) as well as sites that are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. The EPA administers the Superfund program in cooperation with individual states and tribal governments; this database is made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Oct 25, 2013 NPL PROPOSED NPL DELETED NPL SEMS SEMS ARCHIVE CERCLIS Appendix: Database Descriptions 385 22 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 CERCLIS - No Further Remedial Action Planned:rr-CERCLIS NFRAP-bb An archived site is one at which EPA has determined that assessment has been completed and no further remedial action is planned under the Superfund program at this time. The Archive designation means that, to the best of EPA's knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL). This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that, based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site. Government Publication Date: Oct 25, 2013 CERCLIS Liens:rr-CERCLIS LIENS-bb A Federal Superfund lien exists at any property where EPA has incurred Superfund costs to address contamination ("Superfund site") and has provided notice of liability to the property owner. A Federal CERCLA ("Superfund") lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent Superfund monies. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Jan 30, 2014 RCRA CORRACTS-Corrective Action:rr-RCRA CORRACTS-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. At these sites, the Corrective Action Program ensures that cleanups occur. EPA and state regulators work with facilities and communities to design remedies based on the contamination, geology, and anticipated use unique to each site. Government Publication Date: Oct 17, 2017 RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD Facilities:rr-RCRA TSD-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. This database includes Non-Corrective Action sites listed as treatment, storage and/or disposal facilities of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Government Publication Date: Oct 17, 2017 RCRA Generator List:rr-RCRA LQG-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Large Quantity Generators (LQGs) generate 1,000 kilograms per month or more of hazardous waste or more than one kilogram per month of acutely hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Oct 17, 2017 RCRA Small Quantity Generators List:rr-RCRA SQG-bb RCRA Info is the EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Small Quantity Generators (SQGs) generate more than 100 kilograms, but less than 1,000 kilograms, of hazardous waste per month. Government Publication Date: Oct 17, 2017 RCRA Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators List:rr-RCRA CESQG-bb RCRA Info is the EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQG) generate 100 kilograms or less per month of hazardous waste or one kilogram or less per month of acutely hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Oct 17, 2017 RCRA Non-Generators:rr-RCRA NON GEN-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Oct 17, 2017 CERCLIS NFRAP CERCLIS LIENS RCRA CORRACTS RCRA TSD RCRA LQG RCRA SQG RCRA CESQG RCRA NON GEN 386 23 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 Federal Engineering Controls-ECs:rr-FED ENG-bb Engineering controls (ECs) encompass a variety of engineered and constructed physical barriers (e.g., soil capping, sub-surface venting systems, mitigation barriers, fences) to contain and/or prevent exposure to contamination on a property. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Jan 20, 2016 Federal Institutional Controls- ICs:rr-FED INST-bb Institutional controls are non-engineered instruments, such as administrative and legal controls, that help minimize the potential for human exposure to contamination and/or protect the integrity of the remedy. Although it is EPA's (United States Environmental Protection Agency ) expectation that treatment or engineering controls will be used to address principal threat wastes and that groundwater will be returned to its beneficial use whenever practicable, ICs play an important role in site remedies because they reduce exposure to contamination by limiting land or resource use and guide human behavior at a site. Government Publication Date: Jan 20, 2016 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS 1982 TO 1986-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. Government Publication Date: 1982-1986 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS 1987 TO 1989-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. Government Publication Date: 1987-1989 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Feb 8, 2017 The Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) Brownfield Database:rr-FED BROWNFIELDS-bb Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Cleaning up and reinvesting in these properties protects the environment, reduces blight, and takes development pressures off greenspaces and working lands. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Aug 16, 2017 FEMA Underground Storage Tank Listing:rr-FEMA UST-bb The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security maintains a list of FEMA owned underground storage tanks. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2017 LIEN on Property:rr-SEMS LIEN-bb The EPA Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) provides LIEN information on properties under the EPA Superfund Program. Government Publication Date: Dec 11, 2017 State Solid Waste Landfills:rr-SWF/LF-bb The solid waste program in the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is designed to encourage the reuse and recycling of solid waste and to regulate the disposal and treatment of solid waste, including regulated medical waste, and to ensure that hazardous waste is properly managed. Standards are designed to protect human health and the environment and driven by regulatory requirements. Government Publication Date: Oct 3, 2017 FED ENG FED INST ERNS 1982 TO 1986 ERNS 1987 TO 1989 ERNS FED BROWNFIELDS FEMA UST SEMS LIEN SWF/LF 387 24 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 Leaking Petroleum Storage Tanks:rr-LST-bb When a release occurs from an aboveground or underground storage tank, the owner and/or operator of the tank is required to report the release to the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). This database contains a listing of releases from tanks both above and underground. Government Publication Date: Feb 6, 2018 Delisted Leaking Petroleum Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED LST-bb Facilities which have been removed from the list of leaking petroleum storage tanks made available by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Facilities may be removed from the lists of leaking petroleum tanks when it is determined that the release reported is not an actual release, or the released substance is not petroleum - these sites may still have endured non-petroleum hazardous substance releases. Government Publication Date: Feb 6, 2018 Underground Storage Tanks:rr-UST-bb A listing of registered underground storage tanks. This list is maintained by The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: Feb 6, 2018 Aboveground Storage Tanks:rr-AST-bb A listing of registered aboveground storage tanks. This list is maintained by The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: Feb 6, 2018 Delisted Tanks:rr-DELISTED TANK-bb Facilities which have been removed from the list of registered aboveground and/or underground storage tanks made available by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Facilities may be removed from the lists of registered tanks when it is determined that the tank does not require registration, for example, due to capacity or contents. Government Publication Date: Feb 6, 2018 Institutional Controls:rr-INST CONTROL-bb Institutional controls are legal or contractual restrictions on property use that remain effective after remediation is completed and are used to satisfy remediation levels. This list is maintained by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: Jan 23, 2018 Voluntary Remediation Program:rr-VRP-bb The Voluntary Remediation Program is to encourage hazardous substance cleanups that might not otherwise take place. The program is a streamlined mechanism for site owners or operators to voluntarily address contamination at sites with concurrence from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: Jan 23, 2018 Brownfields Site Specific Assessments:rr-BROWNFIELDS-bb Brownfields are idled, underutilized, or abandoned industrial or commercial properties where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination. Examples include factories, railyards, landfills, dry cleaners, etc. This list is maintained by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: Aug 22, 2017 Tribal Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs) on Tribal/Indian Lands:rr-INDIAN LUST-bb Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs) on Tribal/Indian Lands in EPA Region 3, which includes Virginia. There are no LUST records in Virginia at this time. Government Publication Date: Feb 20, 2014 Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) on Indian Lands:rr-INDIAN UST-bb Listing of Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) on Tribal/Indian Lands in EPA Region 3, which includes Virginia. There are no UST records in Virginia at this time. Government Publication Date: Feb 20, 2014 Delisted Tribal Leaking Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED ILST-bb Leaking Underground Storage Tank facilities which have been removed from the Regional Tribal LUST lists made available by the EPA. LST DELISTED LST UST AST DELISTED TANK INST CONTROL VRP BROWNFIELDS INDIAN LUST INDIAN UST DELISTED ILST 388 25 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 Government Publication Date: Aug 3, 2017 Delisted Tribal Underground Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED IUST-bb Underground Storage Tank facilities which have been removed from the Regional Tribal UST lists made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Aug 3, 2017 County No County standard environmental record sources available for this State. Additional Environmental Record Sources Federal Facility Registry Service/Facility Index:rr-FINDS/FRS-bb The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s Facility Registry System (FRS) is a centrally managed database that identifies facilities, sites or places subject to environmental regulations or of environmental interest. FRS creates high-quality, accurate, and authoritative facility identification records through rigorous verification and management procedures that incorporate information from program national systems, state master facility records, data collected from EPA's Central Data Exchange registrations and data management personnel. Government Publication Date: Dec 12, 2017 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program:rr-TRIS-bb The EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) is a database containing data on disposal or other releases of over 650 toxic chemicals from thousands of U.S. facilities and information about how facilities manage those chemicals through recycling, energy recovery, and treatment. One of TRI's primary purposes is to inform communities about toxic chemical releases to the environment. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2016 Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System:rr-HMIRS-bb US DOT - Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) Incidents Reports Database taken from Hazmat Intelligence Portal, U.S. Department of Transportation. Government Publication Date: Sep 11, 2017 National Clandestine Drug Labs:rr-NCDL-bb The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this data as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Government Publication Date: Dec 21, 2017 Inventory of Open Dumps, June 1985:rr-ODI-bb The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA of the Act) provides for publication of an inventory of open dumps. The Act defines "open dumps" as facilities which do not comply with EPA's "Criteria for Classification of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and Practices" (40 CFR 257). Government Publication Date: Jun 1985 EPA Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands:rr-IODI-bb Public Law 103-399, The Indian Lands Open Dump Cleanup Act of 1994, enacted October 22, 1994, identified ongressional concerns that solid waste open dump sites located on American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) lands threaten the health and safety of residents of those lands and contiguous areas. The purpose of the Act is to identify the location of open dumps on Indian lands, assess the relative health and environment hazards posed by those sites, and provide financial and technical assistance to Indian tribal governments to close such dumps in compliance with Federal standards and regulations or standards promulgated by Indian Tribal governments or Alaska Native entities. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 1998 Toxic Substances Control Act:rr-TSCA-bb DELISTED IUST FINDS/FRS TRIS HMIRS NCDL ODI IODI TSCA 389 26 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 8(a) Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) rule and changing its name to the Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule. The CDR enables EPA to collect and publish information on the manufacturing, processing, and use of commercial chemical substances and mixtures (referred to hereafter as chemical substances) on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory (TSCA Inventory). This includes current information on chemical substance production volumes, manufacturing sites, and how the chemical substances are used. This information helps the Agency determine whether people or the environment are potentially exposed to reported chemical substances. EPA publishes submitted CDR data that is not Confidential Business Information (CBI). Government Publication Date: Jun 30, 2017 Hist TSCA:rr-HIST TSCA-bb The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 8(a) Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) rule and changing its name to the Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule. The 2006 IUR data summary report includes information about chemicals manufactured or imported in quantities of 25,000 pounds or more at a single site during calendar year 2005. In addition to the basic manufacturing information collected in previous reporting cycles, the 2006 cycle is the first time EPA collected information to characterize exposure during manufacturing, processing and use of organic chemicals. The 2006 cycle also is the first time manufacturers of inorganic chemicals were required to report basic manufacturing information. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2006 FTTS Administrative Case Listing:rr-FTTS ADMIN-bb An administrative case listing from the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), together known as FTTS. This database was obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Compliance Database (NCDB). The FTTS and NCDB was shut down in 2006. Government Publication Date: Jan 19, 2007 FTTS Inspection Case Listing:rr-FTTS INSP-bb An inspection case listing from the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), together known as FTTS. This database was obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Compliance Database (NCDB). The FTTS and NCDB was shut down in 2006. Government Publication Date: Jan 19, 2007 Potentially Responsible Parties List:rr-PRP-bb Early in the cleanup process, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducts a search to find the potentially responsible parties (PRPs). EPA looks for evidence to determine liability by matching wastes found at the site with parties that may have contributed wastes to the site. Government Publication Date: Oct 10, 2017 State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing:rr-SCRD DRYCLEANER-bb The State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners (SCRD) was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. Coalition members are states with mandated programs and funding for drycleaner site remediation. Current members are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. Government Publication Date: Nov 08, 2017 Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS):rr-ICIS-bb The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) is a system that provides information for the Federal Enforcement and Compliance (FE&C) and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs. The FE&C component supports the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Civil Enforcement and Compliance program activities. These activities include Compliance Assistance, Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement. The NPDES program supports tracking of NPDES permits, limits, discharge monitoring data and other program reports. Government Publication Date: Nov 18, 2016 Drycleaner Facilities:rr-FED DRYCLEANERS-bb A list of drycleaner facilities from the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tracks facilities that possess NAIC and SIC codes that classify businesses as drycleaner establishments. Government Publication Date: Sep 14, 2016 Delisted Drycleaner Facilities:rr-DELISTED FED DRY-bb List of sites removed from the list of Drycleaner Facilities (sites in the EPA's Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) with NAIC or SIC codes identifying the business as a drycleaner establishment). Government Publication Date: Sep 14, 2016 HIST TSCA FTTS ADMIN FTTS INSP PRP SCRD DRYCLEANER ICIS FED DRYCLEANERS DELISTED FED DRY 390 27 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 Formerly Used Defense Sites:rr-FUDS-bb Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) are properties that were formerly owned by, leased to, or otherwise possessed by and under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense prior to October 1986, where the Department of Defense (DoD) is responsible for an environmental restoration. This list is published by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Government Publication Date: Nov 22, 2016 Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS):rr-MLTS-bb A list of sites that store radioactive material subject to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing requirements. This list is maintained by the NRC. As of September 2016, the NRC no longer releases location information for sites. Site locations were last received in July 2016. Government Publication Date: Sep 13, 2016 Historic Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS) sites:rr-HIST MLTS-bb A historic list of sites that have inactive licenses and/or removed from the Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS). In some cases, a site is removed from the MLTS when the state becomes an "Agreement State". An Agreement State is a State that has signed an agreement with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) authorizing the State to regulate certain uses of radioactive materials within the State. Government Publication Date: Jan 31, 2010 Mines Master Index File:rr-MINES-bb The Master Index File (MIF) contains mine identification numbers issued by the Department of Labor Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) for mines active or opened since 1971. Note that addresses may or may not correspond with the physical location of the mine itself. Government Publication Date: Jul 31, 2017 Alternative Fueling Stations:rr-ALT FUELS-bb List of alternative fueling stations made available by the US Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. Includes Biodiesel stations, Ethanol (E85) stations, Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Propane) stations, Ethanol (E85) stations, Natural Gas stations, Hydrogen stations, and Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE). The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) obtains information about new stations from trade media, Clean Cities coordinators, a Submit New Station form on the Station Locator website, and through collaborating with infrastructure equipment and fuel providers, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), and industry groups. Government Publication Date: Feb 6, 2018 Superfund Decision Documents:rr-SUPERFUND ROD-bb This database contains a listing of decision documents for Superfund sites. Decision documents serve to provide the reasoning for the choice of (or) changes to a Superfund Site cleanup plan. The decision documents include Records of Decision (ROD), ROD Amendments, Explanations of Significant Differences (ESD), along with other associated memos and files. This information is maintained and made available by the US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Government Publication Date: Dec 11, 2017 Registered Pesticide Establishments:rr-SSTS-bb List of active EPA-registered foreign and domestic pesticide-producing and device-producing establishments based on data from the Section Seven Tracking System (SSTS). The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Section 7 requires that facilities producing pesticides, active ingredients, or devices be registered. The list of establishments is made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Feb 28, 2017 Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Notifiers:rr-PCB-bb Facilities included in the national list of facilities that have notified the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) activities. Any company or person storing, transporting or disposing of PCBs or conducting PCB research and development must notify the EPA and receive an identification number. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2017 State Spills:rr-SPILLS-bb The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Pollution Response Program (PREP), provides for responses to air, water and waste pollution incidents in order to protect human health and the environment. PREP staff often work to assist local emergency responders, other state agencies, federal agencies, and responsible parties, as may be needed, to manage pollution incidents. Oil spills, fish kills, and hazardous materials spills are examples of incidents that may involve the DEQ's PREP Program. Government Publication Date: Jan 02, 2018 FUDS MLTS HIST MLTS MINES ALT FUELS SUPERFUND ROD SSTS PCB SPILLS 391 28 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 Pollution Complaint:rr-PC SPILLS-bb The database contains a listing of Pollution Complaints from 1986 to 1994 that include petroleum releases and other releases on state land and waters. This list is maintained by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Government Publication Date: 1986-1994 Drycleaners List:rr-DRYCLEANERS-bb A listing of registered drycleaners maintained by the Department of Environmental Quality. Government Publication Date: Jan 16, 2018 Tribal No Tribal additional environmental record sources available for this State. County No County additional environmental record sources available for this State. PC SPILLS DRYCLEANERS 392 29 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180227028 h-Definitions Database Descriptions:This section provides a detailed explanation for each database including: source, information available, time coverage, and acronyms used. They are listed in alphabetic order. Detail Report:This is the section of the report which provides the most detail for each individual record. Records are summarized by location, starting with the project property followed by records in closest proximity. Distance:The distance value is the distance between plotted points, not necessarily the distance between the sites' boundaries. All values are an approximation. Direction: The direction value is the compass direction of the site in respect to the project property and/or center point of the report. Elevation:The elevation value is taken from the location at which the records for the site address have been plotted. All values are an approximation. Source: Google Elevation API. Executive Summary:This portion of the report is divided into 3 sections: 'Report Summary'- Displays a chart indicating how many records fall on the project property and, within the report search radii. 'Site Report Summary'-Project Property'- This section lists all the records which fall on the project property. For more details, see the 'Detail Report' section. 'Site Report Summary-Surrounding Properties'- This section summarizes all records on adjacent properties, listing them in order of proximity from the project property. For more details, see the 'Detail Report' section. Map Key:The map key number is assigned according to closest proximity from the project property. Map Key numbers always start at #1. The project property will always have a map key of '1' if records are available. If there is a number in brackets beside the main number, this will indicate the number of records on that specific property. If there is no number in brackets, there is only one record for that property. The symbol and colour used indicates 'elevation': the red inverted triangle will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Lower Elevation', the yellow triangle will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Higher Elevation' and the orange square will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Same Elevation.' Unplottables:These are records that could not be mapped due to various reasons, including limited geographic information. These records may or may not be in your study area, and are included as reference. Definitions 393 APPENDIX 5 ERIS Historical Aerial Report 394 for the site: Foxglove Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown, VA PO #: Report ID: 20180227028 Completed: 2/27/2018 ERIS InformaƟon Inc. Environmental Risk Informaon ̀ Services (ERIS) A division of Glacier Media Inc. T: 1.866.517.5204 E: info@erisinfo.com www.erisinfo.com Search Results Summary Date Source Scale Comment 2016 NAIP - NaƟonal Agriculture Informa. on Program 1"=800' 2014 NAIP - Na Date:2016 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 396 Date:2014 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 397 Date:2012 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 398 Date:2011 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 399 Date:2009 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 400 Date:2008 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 401 Date:2006 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 402 Date:2005 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 403 Date:2004 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 404 Date:2003 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 405 Date:1997 Source:USGS Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 406 Date:1982 Source:NHAP Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 407 Date:1977 Source:USGS Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 408 Date:1972 Source:USGS Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 409 Date:1963 Source:USGS Scale:1" to 800' Comments: Subject: Hites Road, Middletown, Va Middletown VA Approx Center: 39.06549 / -78.27053 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 410 for the site: Foxglove 2 Marlboro Road Back Creek, VA PO #: Report ID: 20180808184 Completed: 8/9/2018 ERIS InformaƟon Inc. Environmental Risk Informaon ̀ Services (ERIS) A division of Glacier Media Inc. T: 1.866.517.5204 E: info@erisinfo.com www.erisinfo.com Search Results Summary Date Source Scale Comment 2016 NAIP - NaƟonal Agriculture InformaƟon Program 1"=700' 2014 NAIP - NaƟonal Agriculture InformaƟon Program 1"=700' 2012 NAIP - NaƟonal Agriculture InformaƟon Program 1"=700' 2011 NAIP - NaƟonal Agriculture InformaƟon Program 1"=700' 2009 NAIP - NaƟonal Agriculture InformaƟon Program 1"=700' 2008 NAIP - NaƟonal Agriculture InformaƟon Program 1"=700' 2006 NAIP - NaƟonal Agriculture InformaƟon Program 1"=700' 2005 NAIP - NaƟonal Agriculture InformaƟon Program 1"=700' 2003 NAIP - NaƟonal Agriculture InformaƟon Program 1"=700' 1997 USGS - US Geological Survey 1"=700' 1990 NAPP - NaƟonal Aerial Photography Program 1"=700'BEST COPY AVAILABLE 1982 NHAP - NaƟonal High AlƟtude Photography 1"=700' 1977 USGS - US Geological Survey 1"=700'BEST COPY AVAILABLE 1972 USGS - US Geological Survey 1"=700'BEST COPY AVAILABLE 1963 USGS - US Geological Survey 1"=700' 1960 USAF - United States Air Force 1"=700' 1938 USDA - US Department of Agriculture 1"=700'PHOTO INDEX-BEST AVAIL HISTORICAL AERIAL REPORT 411 Date:2016 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 412 Date:2014 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 413 Date:2012 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 414 Date:2011 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 415 Date:2009 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 416 Date:2008 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 417 Date:2006 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 418 Date:2005 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 419 Date:2003 Source:NAIP Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 420 Date:1997 Source:USGS Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 421 Date:1990 Source:NAPP Scale:1" to 700' Comments:BEST COPY AVAILABLE Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 422 Date:1982 Source:NHAP Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 423 Date:1977 Source:USGS Scale:1" to 700' Comments:BEST COPY AVAILABLE Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 424 Date:1972 Source:USGS Scale:1" to 700' Comments:BEST COPY AVAILABLE Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 425 Date:1963 Source:USGS Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 426 Date:1960 Source:USAF Scale:1" to 700' Comments: Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 427 Date:1938 Source:USDA Scale:1" to 700' Comments:PHOTO INDEX-BEST AVAIL Subject: Marlboro Road Back Creek VA Approx Center: 39.08109 / -78.28038 www.erisinfo.com | 1.866.517.5204 428 APPENDIX 6 ERIS Topographic Map Research Results 429 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP RESEARCH RESULTS Date: 2018-02-27 Project Property: Hites Road, Middletown, Va, Middletown, VA ERIS Order Number: 20180227028 Address: 38 Lesmill Road Unit 2, Toronto, ON M3B 2T5 Phone: 1-866-517-5204 Fax: 416-447-7658 info@erisinfo.com www.erisinfo.com Topographic Maps included in this report are produced by the USGS and are to be used for research purposes including a phase I report. Maps are not to be resold as commercial property. No warranty of Accuracy or Liability for ERIS: The information contained in this report has been produced by ERIS Information Inc. (in the US) and ERIS Information Limited Partnership (in Canada), both doing business as 'ERIS', using Topographic Maps produced by the USGS. This maps contained herein does not purport to be and does not constitute a guarantee of the accuracy of the information contained herein. Although ERIS has endeavored to present you with information that is accurate, ERIS disclaims, any and all liability for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in such information and data, whether attributable to inadvertence, negligence or otherwise, and for any consequences arising therefrom. Liability on the part of ERIS is limited to the monetary value paid for this report. We have searched USGS collections of current topographic maps and historical topographic maps for the project property. Below is a list of maps found for the project property and adjacent area. Maps are from 7.5 and 15 minute topographic map series, if available. Year Map Series 2013 7.5 1999 7.5 1986 7.5 1972 7.5 1966 7.5 1943 15 1937 15 1923 15 430 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP RESEARCH RESULTS Date: 2018-08-09 Order Number: 20180808184 Site Name: Foxglove 2 Address: Marlboro Road, Back Creek, VA Address: 38 Lesmill Road Unit 2, Toronto, ON M3B 2T5 Phone: 1-866-517-5204 Fax: 416-447-7658 info@erisinfo.com www.erisinfo.com Topographic Maps included in this report are produced by the USGS and are to be used for research purposes including a phase I report. Maps are not to be resold as commercial property. No warranty of Accuracy or Liability for ERIS: The information contained in this report has been produced by ERIS Information Inc. (in the US) and ERIS Information Limited Partnership (in Canada), both doing business as 'ERIS', using Topographic Maps produced by the USGS. This maps contained herein does not purport to be and does not constitute a guarantee of the accuracy of the information contained herein. Although ERIS has endeavored to present you with information that is accurate, ERIS disclaims, any and all liability for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in such information and data, whether attributable to inadvertence, negligence or otherwise, and for any consequences arising therefrom. Liability on the part of ERIS is limited to the monetary value paid for this report. We have searched USGS collections of current topographic maps and historical topographic maps for the project property. Below is a list of maps found for the project property and adjacent area. Maps are from 7.5 and 15 minute topographic map series, if available. Year Map Series 2016 7.5 1999 7.5 1986 7.5 1972 7.5 1966 7.5 1943 15 1937 15 1923 15 431 2013 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018022702800.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 432 2016 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018080818400.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 433 1999 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018022702800.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 434 1999 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018080818400.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 435 1986 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018022702800.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 436 1986 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018080818400.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 437 1972 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018022702800.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 438 1972 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018080818400.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 439 1966 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018022702800.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 440 1966 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018080818400.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 441 1943 Source: USGS 15 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018022702800.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 442 1943 Source: USGS 15 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018080818400.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 443 1937 Source: USGS 15 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018022702800.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 444 1937 Source: USGS 15 Minute Topographic Map Order No. 2018080818400.4 0.80.2 Miles Quadrangle(s): Middletown,VA 445 APPENDIX 7 The ERIS Environmental Lien Search Report 446 THE ERIS ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN SEARCH REPORT MARLBORO ROAD BACK CREEK, VA ERIS Project No. 20180808184 08/10/2018 447 ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN REPORT The ERIS Environmental Lien Search Report provides results from a search of available current land title records for environmental cleanup liens and other activity and use limitations, such as engineering and institutional controls. A network of professional, trained researchers, following established procedures, uses client supplied property information to: ● Search for parcel information and / or legal description ● Search for ownership information ● Research official land title documents recorded at jurisdictional agencies such as recorder's' office, registries of deeds, county clerks' offices, etc. ● Access a copy of the deed ● Search for environmental encumbrance(s) associate with the deed ● Provide a copy of any environmental encumbrance(s) based upon a review of keywords in the instrument(s) (title, parties involved and description) ● Provide a copy of the deed or cite documents reviewed Thank You For Your Business Please contact ERIS at 416-510-5204 with any questions or comments LIMITATION This report is neither a guarantee of title, a commitment to insure, or a policy of title insurance. ERIS – Environmental Risk Information Services does not guarantee nor include any warranty of any kind whether expressed or implied, about the validity of all information included in this report since this information is retrieved as it is recorded from various agencies that make it available. The total liability is limited to the fee paid for this report. 448 ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN REPORT The ERIS Environmental Lien Search Report is intended to assist in the search for environmental liens filed in land title records. TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION ADDRESS MARLBORO ROAD BACK CREEK, VA RESEARCH SOURCE FREDERICK, VA COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY DEED INFORMATION Type of Instrument: DEED Grantor: HENRY H BRUMBACK, FRANKLIN H BRUMBACK, JAMES I BRUMBACK AND MARGARET B DOUGLAS Grantee: WOODBINE FARMS INC Deed Dated: 01/03/2004 Deed Recorded: 01/06/2004 Instrument: BOOK 307 / PAGE 588 LEGAL DESCRIPTION 271.00 ACRES FMP-2015 Assessor's Parcel Number (s): 73-A-21 449 ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN Environmental Lien: Found X Not Found If Found Describe: OTHER ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS (AULs) Other AULs: Found X Not Found If Found Describe: LEASES Lessor: NONE IDENTIFIED Lessee: Lease Date: Recorded Date: Instrument #: Lease Type: Comments: 450 0 {0000182 c,t\) att N) TEISDEED OF CONrrxnLa.-TION, Er& Ed d&d'lhis 3r day of l.fltrry,20i0/.,by md bcfc,cca HENRY lv( BRUI\'IBACX( FRANKLIN II- BRI,MBACXL ,AMES I. BRT,MBACX md MARGARET B. DQIICI.AI. indivi&atly od rr Pqto.rr Eading rs WOODBINE FARft6. e VirgiDis gcactat psocrrtb, haetu calhd 6c Grms, od V@DBINE EABMS-DIQ.' a VirgiDis corpadio, Gndoo. WIIEREAS, rtc &cseid individnl fuorr @ dccd dtcd Jaaury 25' 1965, recadcd in thc Clcrts Officc of thc Cir$it CMt of Frcdcrid( Coudy' Virginiq in Docd Book 307, d Paga 5tt, c@rryod ssvtral tsecb or parocb of tud to Wo&itrt Frms, IDc.; ed WHEREAS, lhctrc ha risca e $r.ti@ wtcffcr FtEk If Bnobadq Jucs I. Brmbeds llery l,f Bnrmbac& ud trtrgga B. podg es fus iE the af,oresaid dctd wcrc aoting bd in fun iodividnt caecities as wcll as pdtD.rB of W@eiDc Frns, a lJ.rgiair gwd pcmship; WHEREAS, ssll fffi indivi&uts cloaty bclictid md irodcd to sign srch dced botL in 6cn iDdivi&sls ceacitics as wcll as patoas h woodbine Fros, a virginie grorral paosship (c'Icctr wilt tlspcct to Tract No. 3 6scin, wticl was crrwudy inshrdod in such rtcod od wilt orc[ conoctim bcing addrcssod by r scpruc dccd of concaio of area ddc recaded tmcaiacty 451 ta.rtrl'aE ot!qn (.) pichrrao; NOW TIIERFORI WITNESSEIIT Ttd for udin coosi&rdio of ttc fuEgoing Flois od da gmd cusideruio,ltc fufis h.rcby rcUowlcdgc, cmfrD od rtpresca thd tbir si8[afr€s ctn 6e decd drtcd Jmury 26, t%5, rwqdod in thc Cledcs Officc of rbe Cirqdt Cort of Frcdcriel C@ty, VirBinir, h Dccd Book 307, 8t PegG SEt, wt t bolt in 6cir individEl oaaritics od in thcn c+acitics rs pstocrs of Woodbinc Frnrr a Virginia gcolrel pdtncrship, ud all rtftctoocs to 6c abott Grmrs in such 1965 dcd shall bo bofr rs indivirnnb od as prffis in Woodtino Fsos" a Viryinia gcoerat pstncntb, with sucb psto€$hh Uetog tcrcty offinca as a Grdm in said dccd as welL ltc sigldrcs hltdabclow sc bo(h doc as individruls md as perrncrs of Woodbino Fm+ a Virgioie gracral potocrship. WITNESS lfrG fouwing signarts od rcals: (SEAL) 452 ..,TCrc o,\) UI 6EAL) STATEOFVIRCINIA CITYTOJNIY Of -'-t<'az *'cY- .** Ttc foreoing instruEd was a&orlcdgd bc'frc nc in ny City/Cotdy edste6is 3!P &yof s*R1 -20()4,byHENRYM. BRT'MBACI( My Cmirsio Eryirce:{tq \t,-n,*- NOTARYPI,'BLIC -Tz o-A-eii;:- - i--ti.r *r'<o ) STATEOF VIRGIMA, CITY/COUNTYOF f-<osr'u- .5-rrr;s Ttc furgoiog in*runcot *rs uloowlcdgpd bcfuc mc in my Cityl@nty md Ste fti! 3I'P dEy of <{+,v f-'{,2004" byFRANKLtr{H, BRI,JMBACK. My CmissioEtpitcs:diq B 1,-zo.r.-M NCTTARYPUBUC 'PoE,€fL\- iJ. SraT fwso ) STAIEOF VIRGIMA, CITYrcOUNTYOF -F<agrtcr- . to-wit 453 Lrnr.--il FO cn ctr fb fucgoio8 iBE rrrd nas acluoudodgod bduo re ia ny CityrCmy adsEcti! 3P dsyof ?A..vN"{, 2O{trIAIlES t BRI,JMBACIC NOTARYPT,JBUC --\1tzo6€c-\- W, <(,,A}/<DJ STATEOFVIRGINIA CITYrcOUNTYOF ftdD<t!tcr- . toEwit Ttc ftrrgoiog instuscd sts rcr.r'wlalged bc6o mc h my Cityrcotdy edscrctir ;? deyof {rr,recl .20!ryuencanrrn. DOUOLAS. Ir{y Cmirrim Eryircs:*\"/".( sl t"zry- VIRGINI.A FREDERTCT OO['NTY' SCT' Thi. @lEadnitilrFodd !o tE 6 frffi ..*A;li ".t"*i'ar""'1t'cr;1o.rg 1t NCTTARYPT,'BUC -?oc€re.- i,tr. (r.rtr..ro J H;il;;;i;;;.r'heo-r'd tsY s'c' 5t'r'802 of lJil-L , a s.trllt u!'t h"n Fid' tl 'r'*sbl' {r,,*,/l/u^, '*." 454 THE ERIS ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN SEARCH REPORT FOXGLOVE HITES RD MIDDLETOWN, VA 22655 ERIS Project No. 20180227028 MARCH 2, 2018 455 ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN REPORT The ERIS Environmental Lien Search Report provides results from a search of available current land title records for environmental cleanup liens and other activity and use limitations, such as engineering and institutional controls. A network of professional, trained researchers, following established procedures, uses client supplied property information to: ● Search for parcel information and / or legal description ● Search for ownership information ● Research official land title documents recorded at jurisdictional agencies such as recorder's' office, registries of deeds, county clerks' offices, etc. ● Access a copy of the deed ● Search for environmental encumbrance(s) associate with the deed ● Provide a copy of any environmental encumbrance(s) based upon a review of keywords in the instrument(s) (title, parties involved and description) ● Provide a copy of the deed or cite documents reviewed Thank You For Your Business Please contact ERIS at 416-510-5204 with any questions or comments LIMITATION This report is neither a guarantee of title, a commitment to insure, or a policy of title insurance. ERIS – Environmental Risk Information Services does not guarantee nor include any warranty of any kind whether expressed or implied, about the validity of all information included in this report since this information is retrieved as it is recorded from various agencies that make it available. The total liability is limited to the fee paid for this report. 456 ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN REPORT The ERIS Environmental Lien Search Report is intended to assist in the search for environmental liens filed in land title records. TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION ADDRESS HITES RD MIDDLETOWN, VA 22655 RESEARCH SOURCE FREDERICK COUNTY RECORDER OF DEEDS VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY DEED INFORMATION Type of Instrument: DEED Grantor: HENRY M BRUMBACK AND GLADYS B BRUMBACK, HIS WIFE; FRANKLIN H BRUMBACK AND BETTIE G BRUMBACK, HIS WIFE; JAMES I BRUMBACK AND MARY H BRUMBACK, HIS WIFE; AND MARGARET B DOUGLAS AND JAMES M DOUGLAS, HER HUSBAND Grantee: WOODBINE FARMS INC Deed Dated: 01/26/1965 Deed Recorded: 02/12/1965 Instrument: 307 / 588 LEGAL DESCRIPTION 197.00 ACRES FMP-2015 Assessor's Parcel Number (s): 84-A-50 ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN Environmental Lien: Found X Not Found If Found Describe: 457 ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN REPORT OTHER ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS (AULs) Other AULs: Found X Not Found If Found Describe: LEASES Lessor: NONE IDENTIFIED Lessee: Lease Date: Recorded Date: Instrument #: Lease Type: Comments: 458 ffi ffia t /f?15I{BTff . BRUIBACK. ElI AI't! :: :: DED VOODBII{E FN.Ri(}. INC .lr+*r.rrr.rr+l+4rr..r..+* loG 30? ffi 556 lftlE DEED,hrdc rnd dsted dltt 1|'&aay of Jrnurrr' 1955, by lnd beteeen Henry lt. Endrck.nd GLdy. E. lrrd.ck, hl! elfe; Frlnklln H. BrtDb.ck and E.tlle C. EnEbrcI, hls eifei JaEeB I. Efidrck ond !tar, H. BrEback, hts e!fe; and Hargllet B. Dougl.s snd Jsaes ll. Dougl6s, her hu!b!nd, herel$fter called lha GEantoB 6nd Hoodblnc Fams' Inc., . vlrgtnla corPoralton, herelnat'ter cglled the Crantee. tllfNESSEnt I ltrrt ln conaldclatlon of the 6lE of OD. Iloll.r ($I.00) and other valueble cqnBlderrllon Prld th! Graotors b, the Gr€nt.. on oE befora Eh. deltvety of lhls decd' the lecelpt of sl1 of {hlch l5 hereby .cknoUl€dgcd, tlre Crrntorl hereby tr.n!, ael1 end conv.y, eIGh trner.l s.rranEy of !ltl€' unto the Grantee In fee alaPle, tha follo$tng reel eStrte, lotether wtth !11 l4roveoenEt and lPPulEanance. lh.relo belonalng.nd lubject co 611 essecnts .nd let.Ily mforccrblc rcstrictlons of record affecttnS ruch aealty' rMCT No. l: A11 of lhe follni nt descrlbed re.l es tate sltuate in Shlsnee !{8t[!ccrlll Dl8trlct, Frederlck Co6!y, vlrgints, to-t'tc: descrlbed .s folloeB: ro.d oo the Notth 6nd lJest. T T T T 588 I |, I I I ) , i I I , I I I I ; I I i I I I I i I i I I I ! I I I _l I 459 I I Parcel 2- AII lhat .ertaiD palcel of Isnd, ro8elher.elah the iryrovellcDls ahe.ecm and Ehe rppurtenances ahereunto belont:nt, acquired by llenry H. Brurbsck,et aI froE Hs!!I!n M. Blunback snd Fannlc K. Bru.Dback,hls r.lfe, by deed recotded in lhe office of the clerkof rhe Clrcutt Courr of Fredertck €ourty, VirSinir,tn D€ed Book 225, Pote 140, -rheteln rhe sold hroperryis degcribed .s follons: Al1 of thdt certaln lot of land lr@roved bvdrrellint and our bulldints, conlainint 2|'aeres, ' located ql Ehe Hlddle Roa(l tn lhc Comry ot Frederlck,virglnl!, near R€llef. Porcel 3 - A1l. o! rhsE cerEain palcel of land, togerheretth ttE ,rproveE€nts thereon and the appulEenances there- unto belontinS, acqulred by Henry H. Brldback, et 5I froD H!r.o!n H. Blurback and Fannj.e (. Br@back, his eife,by deed recorded ln lhe Office of Ehe Clerk of Ehe Ctrculr CoElt of Fr€derlck Counry, Vlrtlnle, ln Deed Book 225, Page 140, uherein the ssid property ls described sg follorrs: ?h!r cerraln p.Ecel of 16nd, conEalnlnt 90 .ctes,lying a1o[8 the North slde ot the Harlboro Road .nC Esst Ei,de of the Hiddle Road, rbout rhree Eile6 ges! of Stephens Clty, Frederlck County, Vlrtlnia. Parcel 4 - All of th.t cerraln psEcel of 16Dd, loterheriuith Ehe iEploveEenlt there(m and ttE appurtenance6 cheteunlo belontr.nt, acquited by Henry M. BrlDback et al, froE HeEun H. Bndsck and Fanr|le X. Bru$rckr hlg eite, by deed r.corded i.n rhe Offlce of rie Clerk of rhc Clrculr Court of Frederick County, Virtrnis, ln Deea Book 225, P.ge 140, ehereln Ehc aaid property is desclibed.s fol,lous I All of $at cerrain rr.ct of lsnd that conlained 510 acres .r the clme of the desrh of Dud1ey L. Hil,Ler,Iess s aract of 236 acles, one lood and 28 square polesth.! wes conveyed to C, C, Bsusetrsn by Cecilia Hlller l,Ly\ay et al, by Deed d6ted April 24, 1929, snd of lecord l.n lhe .foresaial CIeEk's oiflce in Deed Book I58, rt p.ge 379, chua leavlnt E b€laBce of 271 6crer, 2 roods end 37.2, ehtch 1r conveyed sbsy by !hi3 Deed, A aeteteDce 13 hereby expressly rade to the rfore- enclon€d deecls for s Eoxe psrllcul.r descrlpclon of Ehe foui (4) p.rcelB of l.nd hereln conveyed. sooi 30'7 ff 569 T-nACT No, 2: A1l, of lhe folloyl.ng ilescrlbed reeleilale 6iluste in Sh€enee !,Lsgillerial Di.6!rlct, FredeEtck Colmry, VlrgtDia, to-rrlt i 5e9 E E I i i I I I i I I I I i i tl I I I I ; i i ii I 460 590 loor 307 rur 590 111 of tblt cetloln tr.ct of lend.ttu.Gc iaShdnee l{rtlsterl6I Dr,sGrict of llederlck Coroty,Vl.rtlnir, 6bout tto (2) oll.! aouch of Opequon,'ind@re. p.rticulsrly descrlbed by a ptat rna iurviyof Rlch6rd U. coo+, dsEed Aprtl 20, 1955: Beglru|r,nt at (l) .n tron ptn .! the SE corn.rof lhe 34.14 scrr tract conveyed by BrtEbrckto lflsecarver ln 1944; thence eith clotze N lire; theDce rrlth BrurDsck S 29 314 det. y 67Efeet to rhe poinr of betlnnln8, contalnlng 11.6 acres, nore o! leas. fhls belng lhe seEe Iend vhtch ess conveyed to goodbln. F6tE9, a psltnelshlp corposed of Henry U. BrrrDb.ck,Pr6nklln H. Br[Eback, JsE.6 !. BruDback ond !{rrtsletElelnor llouglas by deed froo IDy p, WigeeErver rnd Len€lrlsecarver, his eife, dared Ury 2, 1,955, and r.<ordedIn the Clerk's Offlce of Ehe CLrcult Court of lrederlckCoEtr, virtinia, in Deed Book 235, page 267, TRACT No. 3: All of thlt certlln tract of 16nd llest of and ebutting opoh the l|lnchester-lront Royel Rosd on the East, located about one and one-haIf Dtles Southof Ninevlh, in l{sr!€n Counly, Vtrtlnla, eontalnlng approxi-D.cely 210 Ecres, Dore or leas, kDosn .r rrsulphur Spr(ntsrr FarD, and belng the aaoe Er.rct of knd th€t uos conveyed to Hoodbine Farns, a pErtnershlp, tlenry H. BluDbEck, FEs.klin H. Bruhb€ck, J6nes 1. Brlebock snd ll.rgeret E. DrunDsck, prrcners, by deed fron Cornelk C. Rich.rd, wido{r, dated Deceober 23, 1957, and recordedin lhe office of Ehe Clerk of the Clrrui.t Coult of Tsrren County, Vlrtinia, ln Deed Book 106, P6te 2, TMCT No. 4: All of thet ceEteln trsc! or percel of lend conlslnin8 104 scres, nore o! Iess, totcther elth r11rlthr8, rithts of rl€y, privlletes, lqroveEents end oppurlenences thereto b.Ionting, lytng cnd belnt aiculc. ebout three El1eE flest of Hlddletosn, ln opequon Dl6cricc, Frederiek Counry, virtlnla, end belnt the s.oe l.nd rhat ua3 conveyed ro Henry H. Blutoback, franklln H. BnEback, J6Ees I. BnEback ond l.srtarct E. Dout1.3, partneri tradint ss goodbtne F6lrr6 by deed dsted iGy 21, 1962, fr6l LuIa H. Xeller, eLdor., Y\otherlne C. Sh&aker and J. B. Sh(Eaker, her hu6b6Bd, Xary S. Hltruderr vldorr' end MyElIe U. Uorcr, sldo$, snd recorded ln Ehc offlce of Ehe Clerk of t-tle Clrcul! court of Frederlck Cotnty, vlrtlnla in Deed Book 282, Pate 567, I -1- I I T T T I I I ; I I t I i I I ) II : i I I i I t I I i I I I I I 461 1 l I I 59r loox 307 hft 591 TMqI No. 5: AII of lhose Ehre€ cercain lracts or iiET" or r-" or rana, t eth€r rlth ell iEpEoveoents sDd appurtensnces ttEreEo belonging, Iylng and being siEuate €bou! 8 olles soulheest of I{inchester' iD Shtune. DkcrlcE, Frederlck CorElEy, virtlDis, one conlalnlnt lt ecres, I rood enil 6 poles, oore or less, another conleinlnt 26 ecrea, 2 roods and 39 poles, Eore o! Ie8s, and ,nother containlng 13 acles, I rood snd 6 poles, oote or less, and belng the saE Parcelsof l5nd ldenrtfied es lots 1, 3, and 5, r€sPectively, on the pl.t of the subdivision of the estate of Henry C. Glalie, ehich is of lecord in the CLerkrs offlce of rhe Circult CoulE ol Flederick CounEy, virginia, ln Deed Book No. I3I, Pege E3, Iess and excePting therefroo e 6E.ll srea lhsE r,ss conveyed to the Ca,@onr.ealth of VitghiE for highrsy constluction purposes by deed daEed July 3I, 1957, snd of recold in srid Clerk's OfItce tn Deed Book No. 25I, Pate 164. thts being the Itoe land ehlch ras conveyed Eo Fr8nk H, EruDbsck, J€oes I. Erunbsck, Henry il. Blusback 6nd Hsrtale! E. Dou8las, partnets trsdlnt es Woodbine FaEEs by deed d.ted Septerbet 15, 1958, fr@ ltarry H. Claize .nd Mrude H. Glalze, ht3 ulfe,and recorded in the office of rhe C1erk of lhe CircuIE Coult of FredeEick CoEIly, vlttlnl., ln Deed Booh 254, Pete 253. TMCT No. 5: AII of those thlee celtain tlacEs of land ifEGfETiQ"quoo ltatis teE io t Dis lric t, Fredcrlc k County, Vi!8inio, epproxitlstely tour (4) uiles Southeast of Stephens Ctty, virginia, and bci.ng Dore Palticul8lly desctibed s8 follosd: P.rcel I - A1l of Ehs! cerEsin lract conbintng 8.02 ecr€!, oote o! less, tccordlng to o survey of Rich3rd U. coode, dated Februsry 19, 1951, IISS trro (2) acres sold by Cr6,aI1 E, colrner er 81 co otndorlf by deed d..ed JuIy 6, 1955, snd recorded in the Office oI the cl€rk of the CirculE Court of Ftederick colllry, virglnir in Deed Book 237 , !t Pate 232. Palcel 2- AII of tha! certlin lract of land siluaEe as aforeaaid conteining ll ecres, tole ot less, and being lore pa!Eiculsrly descrlbed by s survey of nalker t{cc. Eond, dared Autust 9, 1948, sE follfts: "Beginnlng a! a posc in the northeasiem ploPelly Iine of 8€1d Road, s come! to lhe Co rer Bros. Orch.!d, runni,nt r.lEh 6aid Road Line S. 55" 50'E. - 3E5 fi. Eo e [ost cornet !o Ehe 8.05 Acre Tract ot r.ld Conner L.nd .bouE to be conveyed to SPesks sad Johns; thence elth a llne of ssld AroPosed coDveyance N. 35' 38' E' - 1262.8 ft. !o , Post comet ln a rlEe of Eh. Daytd Headl.y Lsnd; thence ulEh s I'inc of said Be.dl.y L.id N, 55' 50' W. - 377 ft. Eo e Post cotn€E -tt_ I I I I I II' Il' !i I I,lrlii I Illlr Ili 462 592 iooi 307 rur S0Z to tlld Connet Eroi. Orchlrd ln ! ltre of !!ldEerdley !.nd; rhence elth ! ltne of ""rJ oi"iiraLand s, 35. w, - 1263 fr. co tJre polni .f- ---- betlnttlIlt,!' Parcel 3 - A1l of chdt cefrlln tr.ct of tsDd cootatlrtat45 €cEeg, @re or less. ltlla conveyrnce ls oade lubject to ahe r.strlctlonr, ea!@entg End bulldlnt llne, of record, lf rny, arfectlnt tha .forei.!d re€lty. Ite crlntoaa coyeo.n! lhat they hlve the aight to coavey 66Id realty to the 6r!ntee; thrt the Ctoncee sh6ll h6va qulet polsesrlon theleof, fr€e fr6 enctebraoces; chrt they hsve done no 6ct to encr.Eber che !@e, and thlt they uIlI ex.cutc luch futtJrer €llurlncas ot Cttlc as Eay be requlslte. IIINESS the folladtn8 .tgn ture! .nd !e!]s! I T t (sE L) Hen!y €ck (SEAL) G B (sErL) TH,ck (sFrL) Betrle c.ac t,,. \(sErL) J s l, SrrEbsck *-/.!ttary H, -5- (sEAL) I I I I I I I I I i I ! i I i i I I I 463 il I T T I aoes STAIE OF VIRCINIA CoIINTY OE EREDERICX, Eo-ett: loff 30'7 ,l[ :193 U€ !ga ! E. Douglas Not6 ry Iic (SEAL) s (sErL) t,, 3 Notary Publlc ln snd for the County of Frederlck, in the Scare of Vlrdinia, do certlfy rhst ltenry lt. Brudeck snd Cladys B. ErtItlbsck, hl! stfe; 8rsnklln ll. Brld€ck snd BerEle G. Drulbsck, his !r!fe; JaEeE I. Brldrck rnd Msry H. Bndb6ck, hi. rrlfe; rnd llartsre! B. Dowlss 6nd JaEe6 I{, Irouglas, her hu6band, chose D!Ee8 are stgned to che foreggiE srititrt be.rtng dale -ton the lt-'-dsy of Janu.ry, 1965, have .cknoeledted lhe saoe before Ea ln Ey Co6ty sod Stste aforesald, clven uder E, h.nd lhis -rlk, * Jsnu€ry, 1965. lly c@iis ion expires L WGI{U ntDtI'O( Cou.ty, 5c, rnt{r9 rar rrodsod ic m. n rh.-lA,,n (Ja -6- 591 i I I I I llt_t I i I I I I I 464 APPENDIX 8 ASTM Standard E 2247-16 User Questionnaire 465 1 ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE (To be completed by the User as defined by ASTM E 2247-16) Property Address: 510 Barley Lane City: Winchester County: Frederick State: VA Zip: 22602 Legal Description: 84A50, 84A29, 73A21 Current Property Use: RA Occupied by Whom: Woodbine Farms Inc Phone: 540-974-0295√ 1. As defined by ASTM E 2247-16, a lien is a charge, security or encumbrance upon title to a property to secure the payment of a cost, damage, debt obligation or duty arising out of response actions, cleanup, or other remediation of hazardous substances or petroleum products upon a property including, but not limited to, liens imposed pursuant to CERCLA 42 USC §§ 9607(l) and 9607(r) and similar state or local laws. In accordance with ASTM E 2247-16 and 40 CFR 312, Timmons Group, through inquiry of the User, completed a lien search for the subject property. Environmental Lien Information was provided: √ by the User  through Timmons Group 2. Activity and Use Limitations (AULs) are legal or physical restrictions or limitations on the use of, or access to a site or facility: (1) to reduce or eliminate potential exposure to hazardous substances or petroleum products in the soil or groundwater on the property, or (2) to prevent activities that could interfere with the effectiveness of a response action, in order to ensure maintenance of a condition of no significant risk to public health or the environment. As the User, are you aware of any activity use limitations for the subject property?  Yes √ No If “yes”, please explain in the spaces provided below: 3. The User must take into account their specialized knowledge of the subject property, the area surrounding the subject property, the conditions of adjoining properties, and any other experience relevant to the inquiry, for the purpose of identifying conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous material at the subject property. As the User of this ESA, do you have any specialized knowledge or experience related to the property or nearby properties?  Yes √ No (continued) 466 2 If “yes”, please describe any specialized knowledge of the subject site in the spaces provided: 4. The User must consider whether the purchase price of the subject property reasonably reflects the fair market value of the property. If the purchase price of the subject property does not reasonably reflect the fair market value of that property, the User should consider whether or not the differential in purchase price and fair market value is due to the presence of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances. Does the purchase price of the subject property reflect the fair market value? √ Yes  No If “no”, does the price of the subject property reflect the occurrence of a release of hazardous material? If not please explain in the spaces below: 5. It is the responsibility of the User to convey any commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information regarding the subject property in identifying potential conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases. As the User, are you aware of commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the property that would help an environmental professional to identify conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases? For example, as the User: a. Do you know the past use of the property? NO KNOWLEDGE_ b. Do you know of specific chemicals that are present or once were present at the property? NO KNOWLEDGE c. Do you know of spills or other chemical releases that have taken place at the property? NO KNOWLEDGE d. Do you know of any environmental cleanups that have taken place at the property? NO KNOWLEDGE (continued) 467 3 6. It is the responsibility of the User to convey any degree of obvious information that represents the detection of a release or threatened release of a hazardous substance at, in, on or to the subject property. As the User of this ESA, based on your knowledge and experience related to the property, are there any obvious indicators that point to the presence or likely presence of contamination at the property?  Yes √ No If “yes”, please explain in the spaces below: In addition, certain information should be collected, if available, and provided to the environmental professional selected to conduct the Phase I. This information is intended to assist the environmental professional but is not necessarily required to qualify for one of the LLPs. The information includes: • the reason why the Phase I is required, • the type of property and type of property transaction, for example, sale, purchase, exchange, and so forth, • the complete and correct address for the property (a map or other documentation showing property location and boundaries is helpful), • the scope of services desired for the Phase I (including whether any parties to the property transaction may have a required standard scope of services on whether any considerations beyond the requirements of Practice E 2247 are to be considered), • identification of all parties who will rely on the Phase I report, • identification of the site contact and how the contact can be reached, • any special terms and conditions which must be agreed upon by the environmental professional, • any other knowledge or experience with the property that may be pertinent to the environmental professional (for example, copies of any available prior environmental site assessment reports, documents, correspondence, and so forth, concerning the property and its environmental condition). Please provide any comments to the above in the space below: NA I certify that to the best of my knowledge the above statements and facts are true and correct. To the best of my knowledge no material facts have been suppressed or misstated. User: Date: 8.7.18 468 APPENDIX 9 ASTM Standard E 2247-16 Property Owner Questionnaire 469 T" I .T,.Y_O- X,S-,G-l I y.? ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE (To be completed by the current property owner as defined by ASTM E 2247-161 Property Address:f\Ncr\\ooco -Ro"-A (c-\os.e\ nt\ od-&-tss is ft"qq -N'\.--$.\\ Ll' g1, ) County: Tred.e-qj c-K State: ri s Zip: >>r. ss Legal Description:-Tox fit-o t\ n 1 -A- A\ Current.Property Use: OccupiedbyWhom: ilooAf,,^, En-*s . -\*-. Phone: 5'{s - \"u'i- t{s3\ 1. To the best of your knowledge has the property or any adjoining property ever been used for an industrial or manufacturing use? tr Yes Etr No E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: To the best of your knowledge has the property or any adjoining property been used as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage, disposal, processing, or recycling facility? tr Yes DI No E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any damaged or discarded automotive or industrial batteries, pesticides, paints, or other chemicals stored on or used at the property? tr Yes Dll No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 4. To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any industrial drums or sacks of chemicals located at the property? tr Yes EltNo E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 5. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property from any other site? tr Yes F No E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 6 To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any pits, ponds, or lagoons located on the site? tr Yes EI No E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 7 . To the best of your knowledge, have there ever been any stained or discolored soils on the property? DYes tr No pUnknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 8 To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any registered or unregistered storage tanks (above or below ground level) located on the property? D Yes F No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 9. To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure located on the property? tr Yes pNo E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain:470 -r- l,r, Yg, *,.?. *c- l. g Y P '10. To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any drains, flooring, or walls located within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors? E yes EI t to E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 1 1. Has there ever been any type of well or non-public watering system located on the property? lf so, have any contaminants been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system? EYes tr No tr Unknown S\ooK we\\ !-r c<\_\Lg lf yes, please identify and explain: 12. Do. you know of any past, threatened or pending lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant ofthe prope(y? tr Yes E No D Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 1 3. Have you or any occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the property or any facility located on the property? tr Yes E No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 14. Do you or any occupant have knowledge of any environmental site assessment of the property that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products on, or contamination of the property, or recommended further assessment of the property? tr Yes ts No D Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 15 Does the property discharge waste water on or adjacent to the property other than storm water into a sanitary sewer system? U Yes E No E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 16. To the best of your knowledge have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires, automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above-grade, buded and/or burned on the property? tr Yes tr No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 17. ls there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records indicating the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)? tr Yes E[ No E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 18. Are you aware of any prior environmental site assessments (Phase I or Phase ll) that have been conducted on the property for any purpose? lf so, please indicate the approximate date of the assessment or investigation and provide the location of the reports. tr Yes E No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: I certify that to the best of my knowledge the above statements and facts are true and correct. To the best of my knowledge no material facts have been suppressed or misstated. Name '4 o n r^P-nu^hn, /'-.Date: oEi t5 /Jot8 471 --T_1,r,"YS-I"":"_G_*?y_? ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE (To be completed by the current property owner as defined by ASTM E 2247-',61 Property Address:'i1* l{Ur as .r".r;11 }o-I caq J o.ec\*so -}'o*d City: nni lJ[,'\..r^ County: E-s\gsjc-< State: { A - Zip: zLG+.s Legal Description:-Tox vy\op * t.{ -A - 1tq --\cx yvr.p * <f .l - A - 5O Current Property Use: Occupied by Whom: \,\ooAt',,.a- Fca-.,,s. -a^c- , Phone: 5.ro - t,ur - \s 3 t 1. To the best of your knowledge has the property or any adjoining property ever been used for an industrial or manufacturing use? tr Yes E No E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 2. To the best of your knowledge has the property or any adjoining property been used as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage, disposal, processing, or recycling facility? D Yes F No E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 3. To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any damaged or discarded automotive or industrial batteries, pesticides, paints, or other chemicals stored on or used at the property? tr Yes tr No f Unknown Jf yes, please identify and explain: 4. To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any industrial drums or sacks of chemicals located at the property? tr Yes El No ! Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 5. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property from any other site? tr Yes E No E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 6. To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any pits, ponds, or lagoons located on the site? tr Yes El No E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 7. To the best of your knowledge, have there ever been any stained or discolored soils on the property? tr Yes tr No E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 8. To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any registered or unregistered storage tanks (above or below ground level) located on the property? tr Yes E No D Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 9. To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure located on the property? O Yes E No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: 472 10 11 12 13 14 '15 16 17 18 3efttf,&o3 .s T" :,Y Y, 9_,l:|, .,s=, 9*l9 _Y,: To the best of your knowledge have there ever been any drains, flooring, or walls located within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors? E Yes E ruo E Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: Has there ever been any type of well or non-public watering system located on the property? lf so, have any contaminants been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system? D Yes B No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: Do you know of any past, threatened or pending lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant ofthe property? tr Yes E No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: Have you or any occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the property or any facility located on the property? D Yes E No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: Do you or any occupant have knowledge of any environmental site assessment of the property that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products on, or contamination of the property, or recommended further assessment of the prope(y? tr Yes E( No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: Does the property discharge waste water on or adjacent to the property other than storm water into a sanitary sewer system? tr Yes El No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: To the best of your knowledge have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires, automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above-grade, buried and/or burned on the property? E Yes tr No D Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: $urY ogsu bi+s , 1 5,*i\e- r,srtr<- rno\o'\r \"nes ls there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records indicating the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)? tr Yes tr No EX Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: Are you aware of any prior environmental site assessments (Phase I or Phase ll) that have been conducted on the property for any purpose? lf so, please indicate the approximate date of the assessment or investigation and provide the location of the reports. tr Yes El No tr Unknown lf yes, please identify and explain: I certify that to the best of my knowledge the above statements and facts are true and correct. To the best of my ial facts have been suppressed or misstated.knowledge no l\-(y^on.ru^b..t L Date: 473 474 475 476 1 Circa~ Cultural Resource Management, L.L.C. 453 McLaws Circle, Suite 3 Williamsburg, Virginia 23185 (757) 220-5023 Assessment and Probability Analysis Foxglove Solar, LLC 557.40 Acres Frederick County, Virginia August 15, 2018 Introduction In August 2018, Circa~ Cultural Resource Management, LLC (Circa~) completed an assessment and probability analysis on two discontiguous tracts that total 557.40 acres of land (Figure 1). The Project Area is roughly three miles northwest of the Town of Stephens City, Virginia on a rolling upland above Buffalo Marsh Run and Meadow Brook. The northern parcel is bordered by Marlboro Road to the north and rural residential lands to the east, south, and west, and by rural residential lands and Buffalo Marsh Run to the west. The southern parcel is bordered by Vaucluse Road to the north, Hites Road to the west, Klines Road and rural residential lands to the south, and rural residential lands to the east. Carol D. Tyrer, Principal Investigator, completed the walkover. Dawn M. Muir, Architectural Historian and Historian, completed the historic research and graphics. Figure 1. Approximate project locations, Middletown quad. 477 2 Environmental Background The primary reasons for incorporating environmental studies into archaeological projects are: to learn of possible environmental constraints or lack of constraints; to determine the presence or absence of critical resources that might have influenced site distribution, etc.; and to discover environmental factors—erosion, deposition, subsidence, and historic land use patterns—that might influence the integrity of archaeological sites once they have formed. Keeping these objectives in mind, a brief environmental summary of the Project Area is provided below. The tracts are situated in the Piedmont region and are comprised of wide, flat upland ridges separated by swales with moderate to steep side slopes towards the stream channels. The northern Project Area sits on a crest with the western and northern section draining via Buffalo Marsh Run and the eastern section draining via Meadow Brook. Elevations across the northern tract range from 754 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) in the stream valley to 843 feet AMSL on the uplands. Presently, trees are evident along the fringes of the streams and along the edges of the fields and in areas where the ground is too rocky to cultivate. A large power line easement runs northwest to southeast across the tract. The southern Project Area sits on a crest with the southwestern section draining via Meadow Brook and the northeastern section draining via Vaucluse Springs. Elevations across the northern tract range from 740 feet AMSL in the stream valley to 822 feet AMSL on the uplands. Presently, trees are evident along the fringes of the streams and along the edges of the fields and in areas where the ground is too rocky to farm. A fruit orchard is in the northern section of the tract. A large power line easement runs northwest to southeast across the northeastern edge of the tract. Aerial photos from 1997 to the present show little change within the northern Project Area during the last 21 years. Aerial photos on the southern Project Area from 1997 to the present show where the apple trees were eventually taken down and removed. The owner indicated that the trees were cut down and the stumps were removed via heavy equipment, to clear the area for fields to grow crops. However, some development has occurred around the Project Areas during this period (Figures 2 - 5). Soils Soils maps and associated data provide an analysis of soil types within a geographic area. Despite comprehensive and detailed coverage of most areas by soils surveyors, researchers often miss microenvironments due to their small footprints. Unfortunately, resource rich microenvironments were often common sites of cultural activity. As such, this analysis of archaeological potential is a “best-guess” using the best available data. Well-drained, agriculturally- and horticulturally-productive soils proximal to transportation corridors were the best choices for historic period occupation. Secondary areas, such as those containing wet soils and acid soils, after improvement such as drainage and liming also may have also been suitable choices for historic occupation. No navigable waterways exist within the Project Area; thus, water travel is not a factor in the site probability analysis of this tract. 478 3 Figure 2. 1997 aerial view of Project Area, from Google Earth. Figure 3. 2007 aerial view of Project Area, from Google Earth. 479 4 Figure 4. 2013 aerial view of Project Area, from Google Earth. Figure 5. Current (2018) aerial view of Project Area, from Google Earth. 480 5 Areas of wet soils may have been attractive to Native American cultures. In these areas, edible herbaceous plant species may have been gathered and faunal species browsing these areas may have been hunted with success. Well-drained soils proximal to these resource- rich areas may have made adequate hunting and gathering campsites where the hunted and gathered resources were processed. These sites would have left an observable archaeological footprint. Little archaeological evidence would be located within the wet areas, the immediate locale of resource procurement. Areas containing gravelly soils may have been especially attractive to stone tool- manufacturing Native American cultures, but the level of attraction may have depended on the type and quality of the gravels available in these locations. Well-drained soils proximal to quarry-able, gravel-rich areas would have made adequate lithic material procurement campsites but in this case, archaeological materials may be located at both the campsites and the quarry sites. Soils Identified Within the Project Area At least 13 different soil types and soil type variants exist within the Project Area (Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] 2018). These soil and soil types include Nicholson silt loam, 2% to 7% slopes; Frederick-Poplimento loams, 7% to 15% slopes; Frederick-Poplimento very rocky loams, 15% to 45% slopes; Carbo-Oaklet outcrop complex, 2% to 15% slopes; Carbo-Oaklet very rocky silt loams, 2% to 15% slopes; Oaklet silt loam, 7% to 15% slopes; Frederick-Poplimento very rocky loams, 7% to 15% slopes; Oaklet silt loam, 2% to 7% slopes; Frederick-Poplimento loams, 15% to 25% slopes; Massanetta loam; Carbo silt loam, 7% to 15% slopes; Frederick-Poplimento loams, 2% to 7% slopes; and Timberville silt loam, 2%-7% slopes (Figures 6 and 7 and Table 1). Each of these types and variants are described below including references to drainage, hunting and gathering potential, and horticultural and agricultural productivity potential. Further, conclusions regarding the suitability of each for historic and Native American occupation and archaeological site probability are also explained. Table 1. Soils Identified Within the Project Area Boundaries. Soil Symbol Soil Name Acres Within the Project Area Location Within the Project Area Percentage Within the Project Area 31B Nicholson silt loam, 2%-7% slopes 146.50 Southeastern parcel 26% 14C Frederick-Poplimento loams, 7%-15% slopes 95.40 Northeastern parcel 17% 16D Frederick-Poplimento very rocky loams, 15%- 45% slopes 79.50 Northeastern parcel 14 7C Carbo-Oaklet outcrop complex, 2%-15% slopes 76.90 Southeastern parcel 14% 6C Carbo-Oaklet very rocky silt loams, 2%-15% slopes 58.00 Southeastern parcel 10% 32C Oaklet silt loam, 7%-15% slopes 39.40 Southeast and Northwest 7% 16C Frederick-Poplimento very rocky loams, 7%-15% slopes 21.70 Northwestern parcel 4% 481 6 Soil Symbol Soil Name Acres Within the Project Area Location Within the Project Area Percentage Within the Project Area 32B Oaklet silt loam, 2%-7% slopes 20.10 Northwestern and Southeastern parcel 4% 14D Frederick-Poplimento loams, 15%-25% slopes 19.00 Northwestern parcel 3% 29 Massanetta loam 4.40 Northwestern parcel 1% 5C Carbo silt loam, 7%-5% slopes 2.10 Northwestern parcel Less than 1% 14B Frederick-Poplimento loams, 2%-7% slopes 1.80 Southeastern parcel Less than 1% 40B Timberville silt loam, 2%-7% slopes 1.10 Northwestern parcel Less than 1% Nicholson Series (31B) Nicholson soils are very-deep, moderately-well-drained, slowly-permeable soils formed in the mantle of loess underlain by a residuum of limestone, calcareous shale, and siltstone (NRCS 2018). These soils are located on rolling upland ridgetops and shoulder slopes. The depth to limestone, calcareous shale, or siltstone is greater than 60 inches in these soils, which ranges in acidity from mildly alkaline to strongly acid. This soil is mostly cultivated and can support corn, burley tobacco, small grains, truck and fruit crops, hay, and pasture. Some areas are used for urban-suburban development. Those areas with native vegetation can support hardwoods, mainly oaks, maples, black walnut, hickory, ash, beech, elm, hackberry, black locust, Kentucky coffee tree, eastern red cedar. Frederick Series (14C, 16D, 16C, 14D, 14B) Frederick soils are very-deep, well-drained, moderately-permeable soils formed in the residuum derived mainly from dolomitic limestone with interbeds of sandstone, siltstone, and shale, and are located on nearly level to very steep uplands (NRCS 2018). Solum thickness is more than 60 inches with a depth to bedrock greater than 72 inches for this soil, which ranges from very strongly acid to moderately acid. This soil features a surface runoff ranging from low to very high. Most of these soils have been cleared and cultivated with crops such as corn, small grain, hay, tobacco, and apple orchards. Most of the steeper areas are in pasture or forest. The native vegetation includes mostly hardwoods such as oak, hickory, maple, and yellow poplar. 482 7 Figure 6. Northern Project Area soil map, from NRCS website. 483 8 Figure 7. Southern Project Area soil map, from NRCS website. 484 9 Poplimento Series (14C, 16D, 16C, 14D, 14B) Poplimento soils are very-deep, well-drained, slowly-permeable soils that formed in the residuum of a mixture of shale, limestone, siltstone, fine sandstone bedrock found in the Ridge and Valley portion of the Shenandoah Valley (NRCS 2018). These soils are located in the gently sloping to very steep uplands in the Shenandoah Valley. Solum thickness ranges from 40 inches to 70 inches with a depth to bedrock, shale, or siltstone bedrock greater than 60 inches in this very strongly through slightly acid soil. This soil features a slow to very rapid surface runoff. This soil is generally used for crops or pasture. Where cultivated, this soil can support apple orchards, peach orchards, small grains, corn, and mixed hay. The few areas with woodland consist mainly of upland oaks, hickory, yellow poplar, walnut, and ash. Carbo Series (7C, 6C, 5C) Carbo soil is a moderately-deep, well-drained, slowly-permeable soil formed in the material weathered from limestone bedrock located in the nearly-level to very steep uplands in the Appalachian Ridges and Valleys (NRCS 2018). Solum thickness and depth to bedrock ranges from 20 inches to 40 inches in this soil, which ranges from very strongly acid to neutral. This soil features a medium to very rapid surface runoff. Areas that have been cleared are typically used for cropland or pasture and can support crops such as corn, small grain, and hay. Where forested, this soil can support northern red oak, yellow poplar, hickory, maple, black walnut, locust, eastern red cedar, and Virginia pine. Oaklet Series (7C, 6C, 32C, 32B) Oaklet soil is very-deep, well-drained, slowly-permeable soil formed in the material weathered from limestone bedrock on gently undulating to steep upland slopes in the Shenandoah Valley (NRCS 2018). Solum thickness is greater than 60 inches with a depth to limestone bedrock ranging from five feet to more than 14 feet. Soil reactions range from very strongly acid to slightly acid throughout. This soil features a slow to medium surface runoff. These soils are typically used for crops or pasture with minor acreage in woodland. Where cultivated, this soil can support corn, small grain, and hay. Where wooded this soil can support upland oaks, yellow poplar, hickory, maple, eastern red cedar, and Virginia pine. Massanetta Series (29) Massanetta soil is a very-deep, moderately-well-drained, moderately-permeable soil formed in alluvial material derived from upland soils found in the narrow flood plains normally below springs and having carbonate-charged water flowing from limestone bedrock (NRCS 2018). Solum thickness ranges from 20 inches to 40 inches while depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. Soil acidity ranges from slightly to moderately alkaline and effervesces with acid throughout. This soil features a slow surface runoff. Most areas of this soil are cleared and used for permanent pasture. Other areas are used for corn or native vegetation such as mixed hardwoods. Timberville Series (40B) Timberville soil consists of very-deep, well-drained, moderately-permeable soils that formed in alluvial/colluvial materials and can be found on colluvial fans, concave areas, 485 10 and heads of drainageways or low areas adjacent to upland drainageways throughout the limestone valley (NRCS 2018). Solum thickness and depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. Soil acidity ranges from extremely acid to slightly acid unless limed. This soil features a slow to moderate surface runoff. This soil is typically cleared and used for crops or pasture. The remainder of this soil is wooded with native mixed hardwood vegetation. PREVIOUSLY-RECORDED CULTURAL RESOURCES Circa~ performed an archival search for the Foxglove tracts using the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (VDHR) online V-CRIS system on August 16, 2018 and August 21, 2018. This research was completed to determine if historic resources exist within the Project Area boundaries. The search identified no archaeological resources and five architectural resources within the Project Area boundaries. Research was also conducted to determine if resources existed within one mile of the Project Area boundaries. Twelve archaeological resources and 70 architectural resources are present within a one-mile radius of the Project Area boundaries. Table 2 lists all the resources within one-mile of the Project Area boundaries. Figures 8 - 11 show the approximate Project Area boundaries (yellow- shaded area) and resources within proximity. Any resources shaded green on Table 2 are within the Project Area. No VDHR easements are situated within the Project Areas. Five previous Phase I archaeological surveys have been conducted within one mile of the Project Area (Figures 12 and 13). The two most relevant Phase I reports include two pipeline surveys that transect parts of the northern Project Area. These surveys include a Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the VA State Line-Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line (TrAIL) Project, Frederick and Warren Counties and the addendum report conducted in 2008 and 2010 respectively by GAI Consultants, Inc. Three other surveys were conducted near the Project Area and these include a Phase I Archaeological Investigation of the Meadowbrook Substations conducted in 1985 by Thunderbird Archaeological Associates, as well as two Phase I surveys conducted by James Madison University (JMU) Archaeological Resource Center/Laboratory. JMU conducted a Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of the Middle Marsh Tract in Frederick County in 2011 and A Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment of the Middletown Woods Tract in Frederick County in 2012. The two surveys completed by GAI on the two tracts did not locate any archaeological resources within the project area. They did relocate the Miller cemetery and identify a standing house and barn complex on the two parcels. Table 2. Previously-Recorded Cultural Resources Within a One-Mile Radius of Project Area Boundaries. VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation Archaeological Resources 44FK0051 Native American Camp Phase I survey, 11/81 None made 44FK0055 Native American Historic Terrestrial, open air, single dwelling Phase I survey, 11/81 None made 486 11 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 44FK0056 Native American Artifact scatter Phase I survey, 11/81 None made 44FK0057 19th century Historic artifact scatter, chimney fall Phase I survey, 11/81 None made 44FK0712 20th century A lime kiln with an additional structure noted Phase I survey 1/12 None made 44FK0720 19th century Lime Kiln Phase I survey by 1/12 None made 44FK0767 19th century 20th century Tabler Farm Complex, three separate farmsteads and a springhouse Phase I survey 7/08 None made 44FK0768 19th century 20th century Tabler Cemetery, five graves present in two rows, eight internments recorded Phase I survey 7/08 None made 44FK0769 18th century 19th century Tabler Farm Road, 13 feet wide, extends from farmhouse to Marsh Brook Lane Phase I survey 7/08 None made 44FK0770 19th century Merritt’s Camp, encampment of Brigadier General Wesley Merritt’s First Calvary Division, Battle of Cedar Creek, 1864 Phase I survey 7/08 None made 44FK0772 18th century 19th century 20th century East Road, running from Dr. Shipley’s “Belle View” Farm to Hite Mille Road Phase I survey 7/08 None made 44FK0778 (034-5193) 18th century 19th century 20th century Nieswander’s Cemetery, 22 graves associated with the family cemetery Phase I survey 7/08 and 1/17 None made Architectural Resources 034-0002 18th century 19th century Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historic Park aka Isaac Hite Jr. House aka Cedar Creek Battlefield and Belle Grove aka Belle Grove Plantation, 336 Belle Grove Road Route 727, resource includes 3,713 acres that include historic landscapes, monuments, river fords, military encampments, and plantation houses Phase I survey 2/91 Listed on the Virginia Landmark Register 11/8/68 Listed on the National Historic Landmark 8/11/69 Listed on the National Register of Historic Places 8/11/69 and 2/2/03 and 8/11/1969 034-0076 ca 1870 Ash House aka Deerfield Acres, 6124 Middle Road, resource includes a house, a chicken coop, a kitchen, three garages, three vehicle sheds, a barn, and a landscape wall Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 6/18/09 034-0075 ca 1870 Stickley House, 6519 Valley Pike, resource includes a house, silo, two barns, swimming pool, and a shed Phase I survey 9/08 None made 487 12 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-0077 ca 1800 Bauserman House, 6127 Middle Road, resource includes house, spring house, shed, privy, well house, and two archaeological sites Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 6/18/09 034-0084 ca 1790 General Carson House aka Pleasant Green, resource includes the home of General James Carson, three sheds, chicken coop, hog pen, privy barn, springhouse, corncrib, and a family cemetery Phase I survey. 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 6/18/09 034-0138 See also 034-0220 ca 1810 Inn at Vaucluse Spring aka Vaucluse, 231 Vaucluse Spring Lane, resource includes house, workshop, millhouse, two secondary dwellings, a barn, a swimming pool, two sheds, and an archaeological site Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined eligible 6/18/09 034-0139 ca 1815 Rust Hill aka Valerie Hill, 1687 Marlboro Road, resource includes house, secondary dwelling, a meat house, and two sheds Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 6/18/09 034-0140 ca 1840 Baldwin-Clark House aka Buffalo Marsh, resource includes a house, chicken house, shed, school, and a barn Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined eligible 8/16/93 034-0141 ca 1830 Waveland, Route 623, resource includes a house, chicken coop, shed, swimming pool, secondary dwelling, smoke house, garage, workshop and a family cemetery Phase I survey. 9/08 None made 034-0191 ca 1870 Vaucluse Station, Route 638, resource includes a depot, demolished Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR not eligible 3/16/09 034-0228 ca 1900 Sager House, Route 625, resource includes a house, two barns, and a chicken house Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0229 ca 1900 Fishel House, Route 625, resource includes a house and a shed Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0230 ca 1900 House, Route 625, resource includes a house, garage, barn and a shed Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0231 ca 1840 House, Route 634, resource includes a house, gatepost entry, and a garage Phase I survey 1/89 None made 488 13 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-0232 ca 1900 Walters House, Route 625, resource includes a house and a garage Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0233 ca 1870 The Hank Walters House, Route 625, resource includes one house and several sheds Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0234 ca 1900 House, Route 625, resource includes a house and two sheds Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0235 ca 1880 Tenant House for Western View Farms, Route 625, resource includes a house and a smoke house Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0236 ca 1840 Western View Farm, Route 625, resource includes a house, spring house, barn, and a shed Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0237 ca 1810 Abel Tract aka Cedar Creek Battlefield aka Rienzi Knoll aka Dinges House, 294 Rienzi Knoll Lane, resource includes 34.566 acres of battlefield, historic open space, agricultural resources and archaeological potential. Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0238 ca 1875 Epworth United Methodist Church aka Epworth Chapel, resource includes a church and a modern concrete block building Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0239 ca 1870 House, Route 625, resource includes house, smoke house, barn and a garage Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0240 ca 1900 The Cooke House, Route 638, resource includes house, barn, animal shelter, and two sheds Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0241 ca 1870 House, Route 638, resource includes a house, a barn, and a shed Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0242 ca 1810 Rickard House aka Rock Hill Dairy Farm, Route 759, resource includes a house, garage, barn, shed and a silo Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0243 ca 1880 Rickard House, Route 759, resource includes a house, smoke house, corncrib, privy, barn, three sheds, and an orchard Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 489 14 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-0244 ca 1910 Brumback-Huffman House aka Win-Liz Farm, Route 759, resource includes house, smokehouse, corncrib, shelter, barn, shed, and a secondary dwelling Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0254 ca 1830 Miller House, Route 631, resource includes a house, shed, smoke house, and a cemetery Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0259 ca 1880 Cedar Cliff Presbyterian Church aka Unitarian Universal Church aka Unity of the Shenandoah Church, 6460 Valley Pike Road, resource includes one Gothic Revival Church Phase I survey, 8/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-0260 ca 1870 House at Vaucluse, 6470 Valley Pike Road, resource includes a house, smoke house, shed, garage, and a chicken house Phase I survey, 8/08 None made 034-0262 ca 1840 Mildred Kline House, 236 Vaucluse Road, resource includes a house, a garage, shed and a barn Phase I survey, 8/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-0263 ca 1880 House, 782 Hites Road, resource includes a house, shed, and two garages Phase I survey 1/1/89 and 9/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-0264 ca 1870 Shiley Farm, 856 Hites Road, resource includes a house, garage, privy, two sheds, a barn, and a chicken house Phase I survey 1/1/89 and 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 3/16/09 034-0266 ca 1880 Deerfield School, Route 638, resource includes two school buildings Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0267 ca 1870 House, Route 638, resource includes a house and a shed Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0268 ca 1810 Lindamood House, Route 638, resource includes a house and a kitchen Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0269 ca 1820 House, Route 638, resource includes, house, shed, smoke house, barn, and a corncrib Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0303 093-0106 ca. 1861 Cedar Creek Battlefield, Route 11 South (Frederick, Shenandoah and Warren Counties), resource includes a battlefield, and one structure, the Heater House, currently under restoration Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 3/16/09 490 15 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-0428 ca 1830 Conard House, 478 Klines Mill Road Route 633, resource includes a house, smoke house, foundation, secondary dwelling, and a shed Phase I survey, 8/08 VDHR determined not eligible 6/18/09 034-0429 ca 1800 Farmhouse, Route 633, resource includes a house, stable, smoke house, barn, and an apple storage building Phase I survey, 8/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/24/94 034-1018 ca 1840 B.F. Stickley House, Route 11 South, resource includes a house, garage, chicken house, shed, and a foundation Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1019 ca 1800 F. Estes Kline House, Route 11 South, resource includes a house, privy, shed, barn, and a smoke house Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1020 ca 1900 Stickley House, Route 11, resource includes a house, chicken house, animal shelter, and a smoke house Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1021 ca 1900 House, 6688 Valley Pike, resource includes a house and a garage Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-1022 ca 1890 Kiln, Route 11 South, resource includes a brick- lined kiln Phase I survey. 9/2008 None made 034-1023 ca 1880 W. H. Dinges House aka Martha Downes House, 6773 Valley Pike Road, resource includes a house, garage, modern outbuilding, chicken house, barn, and a modern glass manufacturing building Phase I survey 9/08 None made 034-1025 ca 1929 Wise-Chandell House, Route 11, resource includes a house, garage, privy, mobile home, chicken house, and a smoke house Phase I survey 9/08 None made 034-1026 ca 1900 Bayliss-Seaman House, Route 11, resource includes a house, a chicken house, a smoke house, a stable, barn, and a garage Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1027 ca 1940 Nixon’s Motel aka Plantation Garden Apartments, Route 11, resource includes one house Phase I survey 1/91 None made 491 16 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-1028 ca 1873 David Dinges House aka Sunny Side, 7114 Valley Pike, resource includes a house, corncrib, shed, garage, barn, kitchen, meat house, and a cemetery Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1029 ca 1900 E.H. Randall House aka Valley View Farm, Route 11 South, resource includes a house, shed, two carriage houses, privy, shed, barn, a stable, granary and a chicken house Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1079 ca 1903 Harvey A Richard House, Route 628, resource includes house, shed, barn, root cellar, kitchen and a garage Phase I survey 7/89 None made 034-1080 ca 1830 Snapp-Fewell House, 6286 Middle Road, resource includes, house, smokehouse, chicken house, privy, and two sheds Phase I survey 1/1/89 and 9/08 VDHR determined not eligible 6/18/09 034-1404 No date Craig-Miller House, resource includes one house Phase I survey 4/92 None made 034-1405 ca 1815 Sleepy Hollow Farm aka Tuttle-Robinson-Bauserman House, Route 631, resource includes a house, barn, shed, and a pumphouse Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-1406 ca 1920 Rothgeb-Morgan House, Route 631 and Route 625, resource includes a house, garage, privy, and a chicken house Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-1407 ca 1913 Fred W. Ridings House aka Ridings House, Route 625, resource includes house, kitchen, barn, smoke house, well, chicken house, and a shed Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-1422 ca 1890 Judge Rice House aka Kenner House aka Glenmore Farm, 239 Klines Mill Road, resource includes a house, smoke house, barn and a chicken house Phase I survey. 9/08 None made 034-1438 ca 1870 Richards-Fauble House aka W.H. Ridings House, Route 628, resource includes a house, a barn, shed, and a smoke house Phase I survey 1/1/89 VDHR determined not eligible 1/5/93 492 17 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-1439 ca 1917 Luther Snap House aka Sunnyside Farm, Route 628, resource includes a house, privy shed, smokehouse and a barn Phase I survey 1/1/89 VDHR determined not eligible 1/5/93 034-1440 ca 1830 Tewalt-Solenberger House, Route 628, resource includes a house, smoke house, barn, shed, corncrib, and kitchen Phase I survey 1/1/89 VDHR determined not eligible 1/5/93 034-1441 ca 1890 Rogers-Solenberger House, Route 628, resource includes a house, shed, chicken house, barn and an orchard Phase I survey 1/1/89 VDHR determined not eligible 1/5/93 034-1552 ca 1927 Bridge, Route 633, resource includes a slab bridge crossing Meadow Brook Phase I survey 1/95 None made 034-5073 ca 1900 House, 263 Vaucluse Road, resource includes a house, shed, and a garage Phase I survey. 9/08 None made 034-5074 ca 1930 House, 265 Vaucluse Road Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-5075 ca 1880 Woodbrine Farm aka Woodbine Barn, 829 Vaucluse Road, resource includes a house, two sheds and a barn Phase I survey 1/1/89 VDHR determined potentially eligible 6/18/09 034-5077 ca 1831 Harper’s Ferry and Valley Branch of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad aka Winchester and Potomac Railroad Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-5085 ca 1838 Miller Cemetery, south of Route 631, resource includes a family cemetery with seven marked burials and several unmarked, a stone fence delineates the cemetery Phase I survey. 5/09 None made 034-5192 See also 44FK0767 and 44FK0768 ca 1885 Tabler Cemetery aka Tabler Farm, Marsh Brook Lane, resource includes a house and a family cemetery Phase I survey 7/08 None made 034-5193 ca 1780 Nieswander’s Cemetery, Chapel Road, resource includes at least 22 graves Phase I survey, 7/08 None made 493 18 Figure 8. VDHR V-CRIS map showing previously-identified resources within a one- mile radius of the northern Project Area boundaries. Figure 9. VDHR V-CRIS map showing previously-identified resources within a one- mile radius of the southern Project Area boundaries. 494 19 Figure 10. Detailed VDHR V-CRIS map showing previously-identified resources within close proximity to the northern Project Area boundaries. Figure 11. Detailed VDHR V-CRIS map showing previously-identified resources within close proximity to the southern Project Area boundaries. 495 20 Figure 12. VDHR V-CRIS map showing location of previous Phase I surveys and VDHR easements near the northern Project Area. Figure 13. VDHR V-CRIS map showing location of previous Phase I surveys and VDHR easements near the southern Project Area. 496 21 Historic Map Review A review of historic quad maps did show some development near the Miller house and cemetery within the northern Project Area during the early part of the 20th century, although this development does not appear to continue through the latter half of the century (Figures 14 - 17). A review of historic quad maps did show some development near the house and barns within the northern and southern section of the southern Project Area during the early part of the 20th century. These maps do show development around the Project Area. The Project Areas are shown as mostly open fields with forested areas coinciding where the rocky outcrops were noted during the field visit. Figure 14. Detail of 1937 Middletown quad. 497 22 Figure 15. Detail of 1966 Middletown quad. Figure 16. Detail of 1986 Middletown quad. 498 23 Figure 17. Detail of 1999 Middletown quad. Results and Summary This study was conducted to provide information on the current condition of the property, as well as to assess the potential for the presence of archaeological or architectural resources within the Project Area. Fieldwork was completed in August 2018 and included a pedestrian walkover of the tract to identify any obvious archaeological or architectural resources and the site potential of various landforms. Northern Tract Architectural Resources Two previously-identified architectural resources were located on the project tract and two previously-identified resources are located adjacent to the tract (Plates 1 through 14). Previously-Identified Architectural Resources Within the Project Area Site 034-0254 Site 034-0254 is the circa 1830 Miller house identified in 1989 by Maral Kalbian. She indicated that the main house was in ruinous condition with only a five-course, American- bond brick chimney remaining. She also noted a shed, a fine coarse-rubble limestone smoke/meat house, and a cemetery. She did not make any recommendation as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and according to the VDHR V-CRIS form no further survey work has occurred at the site. 499 24 The site is inaccurately mapped in the V-CRIS system and the site is actually located to the northwest of the cemetery, on the eastern edge of a ridge crest. The structure currently consists of a western gable end brick chimney and a portion of the northern wall. The main brick structure rests on a limestone foundation with the limestone foundation evident around a cellar/basement. The chimney has three fireboxes, indicating a basement/cellar and two floors above. There is a large mound filled with brick rubble evident on the southern side of the structure. There are numerous loose bricks within the cellar/basement and strewn around the yard of the structure. In addition, there are several architectural timber beams with square joints on the ends that match the notches on the brick walls. To the northeast of the main structure is the remains of a stone foundation that probably represents an outbuilding. To the north of the main building is a fresh-water seep. Also, to the north is a road lined with limestone rubble. There is an overgrown area to the south of the main structure, where an additional structure may have stood at one time. Plate 1. View of brick ruins, looking southwest. 500 25 Plate 2. View of brick ruins, looking south. Plate 3. View of chimney showing the three fire places, looking southwest. 501 26 Plate 4. View of fireplace in the cellar/basement, looking west. Plate 5. View of fireplace on the first floor, looking west. 502 27 Plate 6. View of fireplace on the second floor, looking west. Plate 7. View of rear of brick chimney, looking east. 503 28 Plate 8. Detail view of the stone foundation, interior of cellar, looking west. Plate 9. Detail view of the joints and notches in brick and the timber (notice notch in brick and matching joint on timber beam end) for the first floor of the structure, looking south. 504 29 Plate 10. View of collapsed wall, looking west. Plate 11. View of stone foundation of an outbuilding, looking northeast. 505 30 Plate 12. View of a fresh-water seep located to the north of the brick foundation, looking north. Plate 13. View of road, looking north. 506 31 Plate 14. View of overgrown area where another structure may have stood, looking south. Site 034-5085 The Miller cemetery is located in an open field that currently functions as a cow pasture. The cemetery has been neglected and is overgrown. GAI noted that many of the headstones are illegible and broken, thus making it difficult to decipher the exact number of burials. There are seven marked headstones, all of which are marble, and there are also several unmarked fieldstones. A stone fence delineates the cemetery but has collapsed in places. All the surnames on the markers are Miller, with first names of Thomas S., Bettie, Cassandra, Joseph, and Mary. GAI suggested that the cemetery has no connection with significant events, themes, or trends in history. As such, they recommended the site as not eligible for listing under Criteria A. No information identifying any person interred in the cemetery as significant in local, state, or national history can be located. Therefore, they recommended this resource not eligible for National Register of Historic Places listing under Criteria B. The cemetery lacks distinctive funerary architecture and does not utilize a specific plan. For these reasons, GAI suggested that the Miller Cemetery not eligible for National Register of Historic Places listing under Criteria C. In addition, GAI noted that there were no secondary resources associated with the cemetery. GAI may have looked at the VDHR V-CRIS mapped location of Site 034-0254 and not seen the ruins during their survey efforts and the correct location of the ruins may have been outside of their area of potential effect. The cemetery is currently overgrown with vegetation (Plates 15 through 21). Portions of the stone walls have collapsed or have been pushed down by the cattle. The graves are laid out in north to south rows, with both headstones and footstones evident. It appears that the markers were purchased, as many have scroll designs along the top. 507 32 A review of the records on Ancestory.com indicate that the Miller family lived in the area most of their lives. The 1850 census shows that Thomas Cox Miller was living at the tract with his 45-year old wife Cassandra, and their sons, 20-year old Joseph Atwell, 19-year old Robert Washington, 17-year old Thomas Madison, and 15-year old Dudley L. In addition, they had a two-year old daughter Mary Ophelia who died in 1834. All the Millers are listed as born in Virginia. Both Thomas M. and Dudley L. are listed as attending school within the year. The census list all the males in the Miller household as farmers. Thomas C. is credited with $20,000.00 in real estate value. A much higher value than his neighbors, whose farms valued an average of $3,300.00. The marriage license indicates that Thomas C. and Cassandra J. McKay were married in Frederick County on January 5, 1829. Their son, Thomas Madison Miller is listed on his marriage license as a doctor and the 1860 census listed him as a physician. Thomas M. attended the Delaware College in Newark, Delaware in 1855. In 1855 to 1856, he attended the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, Virginia. In 1856 to 1857, he attended the Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. In 1857, he received his M.D. degree from the Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. His thesis was titled Typhoid fever as it occurred in the Valley of Virginia. In 1860, he practiced medicine in the Magisterial District No. 8 in Frederick County, Virginia. In 1861, he is listed as a Surgeon, serving with the 51st VA Militia, Berkley County, Virginia ["not yet commissioned"]. In November 1861, he is listed as a Surgeon, serving with the 51st VA Militia, Bath, Morgan County, Virginia ["not yet commissioned, but recommended"]. On November 5, 1861, he married Margaret Celia "Maggie" Davis, in Frederick County, Virginia. Thomas M. died January 18, 1890 and is buried in the Green Hill Cemetery in Frederick County, Virginia (Plate 22). Maggie died in 1930 and is buried next to her husband (Plate 23). The 1880 census shows that Thomas C. Miller was 78 and was living at the tract with his 44-year old son Dudley L. Both Thomas C. and Dudley L. were listed as widowers, and their trades as a farmer. The census indicates that Thomas C’s father was born in Pennsylvania and his mother in Virginia. The high value of the Miller farm would indicate that it was a fairly-large estate; however, the slave records did not indicate that Thomas C. owned any slaves. It could be that the farm was used to raise livestock, which would not require as many laborers. 508 33 Plate 15. View of cemetery, looking southwest. Plate 16. View of cemetery, looking east. 509 34 Plate 17. View of grave marker, looking west. 510 35 Plate 18. View of grave marker, looking west. Plate 19. View of grave marker, looking west. 511 36 Plate 20. View of grave marker, looking west. Plate 21. View of cemetery, looking east. 512 37 Plate 22. View of Thomas M. Miller’s grave marker, Green Hill Cemetery. 513 38 Plate 23. View of Maggie Miller’s grave marker, Green Hill Cemetery. 514 39 Previously-Identified Architectural Resources Adjacent to the Project Area Site 034-0077 This circa 1770 house and springhouse was identified by Michael Quinn in 1973 and is located on the south side of Marlboro Road, near the junction with Middle Road just to the west of the Project Area. Mr. Quinn’s research indicated that in 1973 the house was owned by Ralph Bauserman, who also owned Site 034-0076, Deerfield Acres. At the time of Mr. Quinn’s survey, the house was rented. Mr. Quinn noted that the property had passed through the same ownership as Deerfield Acres, and was originally purchased by Charles Bauserman in 1918 from Charles Snapp, who acquired the property from Mr. Tevault in 1917. Mr. Quinn noted that the type of moldings in the house dated it to circa 1770. He indicated that the structure was expanded originally from a log cabin with stone chimneys at each gable end. He noted a one room addition on the west side on the structure. The original structure has vertical tongue and groove panel partitions throughout. The structure seems to have survived basically untouched and was suffering only from lack of upkeep. Mr. Quinn thought the structure was in fair condition, and under no threat except for lack of upkeep. He noted the following original architectural elements were present at the site: House: A-Door, original 37 inches wide and six foot- two inches high; B-Window, original 55-1/2 inches wide with a 26-inch sill, and CR 37 inches; C-Door, original six-foot four inches high and 34 inches wide; and D-Window of addition 28 inches by 44 ½ inches, with 6/6 double-hung windows. In 1989, the house was resurveyed by Maral Kalbian and she noted the house and spring house as well as a barn, frame shed, and a meat house. One of the sheds is timber-frame, with vertical-board siding and a shed roof. The other shed is concrete-block with a shed roof, and Ms. Kalbian thought small enough to be a privy. Ms. Kalbian noted that a fine course-rubble limestone springhouse with wooden grills stood to the east of the main house adjacent to Buffalo Marsh Run. She believed that while the Bauserman House once functioned as a productive farm, that is was now stands vacant and abandoned. She noted that the complex no longer possessed an intact assemblage of outbuildings and did not currently reflect early 19th century farming practices of Frederick County. She recommended that the complex was not potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A as this resource no longer conveys its historic function. No evidence could be located that connects this property to any significant individuals in history. As such, this resource was recommended ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria B. The main dwelling had lost its integrity through alterations and neglect and coupled with most of its associated agricultural outbuildings no longer standing, further subtracts from its architectural significance. Ms. Kalbian recommended the complex as not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria C. In 2008, GAI resurveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the TrAIL Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted restricted access to the property and their survey was completed from the public-access road. The only extant secondary resource that was observed from the roadway was a wood-framed shed. They noted that the house 515 40 was constructed circa 1800 and consisted of a two-story frame vernacular house on a continuous-stone foundation. It appears that the dwelling is clad in wood siding and topped with a standing-seam metal side gable roof. The fenestration consists of 6/6 and 9/6 double-hung, wood sash windows, but most of the glass panes are no longer intact. A one- story gable roof addition has been appended to the east elevation. They noted that the house was vacant and in very poor condition. GAI recommended that this resource is not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places; however, VDHR asked GAI to conduct a complete Phase I survey to fully access and survey the property. GAI did not receive a response to their request for property access. However, in 2009, VDHR believed that the resource appears potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and the Virginia Landmark Register under Criteria C. In 2010, after gaining property access, GAI noted a house, spring house, well house, and remnants of the frame shed were extant. The privy, barn, and meat house structures were not observed. GAI noted that while previous surveys identify the main house as a log structure, this claim cannot be conclusively substantiated. Their field visit revealed rough-hewn weatherboard siding under exposed sections of the asbestos-shingle siding. No log framing was observed. The roof of the original section of the house is clad in corrugated metal, and three V-crimp metal covers the roof of the addition. Pictures taken from November 2008 and April 2010 showed the continued deterioration of the siding, roof, and the second floor. The spring house stands to the southeast of the main dwelling and features coursed stone construction. They noted that the gable roof on the springhouse was clad in corrugated metal but has collapsed. Only one pegged vent remained intact, while the remaining window and door apertures are now open. They noted that the timber frame shed was no longer intact. Although portions of the timber framing still stand; the wood siding and corrugated roofing material have deteriorated and lay on the ground. The second shed recorded in the 1989 survey appears to instead be a well house. The concrete-block well house is topped by a shed roof clad with standing-seam metal. It features a strap-hinge wood door on the façade. After a site visit with full property access, GAI maintained their original recommendation that the site was not potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A, B, and C. No definitive evidence that the main dwelling features log construction was observed at the time of survey. The exposed corners underneath the asbestos-shingle siding do not feature notching. In addition, this resource remains unoccupied, and due to neglect, the dwelling and its associated outbuildings continue to severely decline. There is no note on the site form indicating if VDHR concurred with GIA’s 2010 recommendations. The site form currently lists the site as potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Circa~ identified the house, springhouse, and well house during their walkover. Plates 24 through 27 show the current condition of the structures. House The house is a circa 1800, two-story, two-bay, side-gable, wood-frame house clad in painted-white wood weatherboard and resting on a rusticated stone foundation with two exterior-end rusticated stone chimneys. The roof is covered in standing seam metal and collapsed exposing the wood framing and the interior. Most of the windows have been 516 41 removed. The entrance on the façade is not visible. There is a one-story, one-bay, side- gable, wood-frame addition attached to the side (east) elevation. Springhouse The springhouse is a circa 1800, one-story, one-bay, side-gable, rusticated stone building resting on a rusticated stone foundation. The roof has been removed and a tree is growing from the center of the springhouse. The windows have been removed. The entrance on the façade is not visible. Well House The well house is a circa 1900, one-story, one-bay, shed roof, concrete-block building resting on a below-grade concrete-block foundation. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the well house. The entrance on the façade is not visible. Plate 24. View of main house, springhouse, and well house at Site 034-0077, looking north. 517 42 Plate 25. View of main house at Site 034-0077, looking north. Plate 26. View of main house at Site 034-0077, looking southwest. 518 43 Plate 27. View of springhouse and well house at Site 034-0077, looking north. Site 034-0139 This circa 1815 house was identified by Michael Quinn in 1973 and is located on the south side of Marlboro Road down a long, tree-lined, paved driveway. Mr. Quinn indicated that the main structure had flat arches over the windows and the basement windows had wood louvers. The rear ell had an enclosed porch. He noted the following secondary structures a circa 1750 central stone chimney southwest of house, which he believed may have been a slave quarters or an original house; a circa 1880 five-course American-bond brick meat house with stepped cornice; a circa 1950 wood shed; and a 1960 machine shed. In 1991, the house was resurveyed by Maral Kalbian. The VDHR V-CRIS site form contains no additional information about her survey. In 2008, GAI resurveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the TrAIL Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted restricted access to the property and their survey was completed from the public-access road. GAI noted that the two-and-a-half- story dwelling was built circa 1815. The structure’s exterior walls were laid in common- bond brick, and a standing-seam metal gable roof tops the house. The fenestration consists of 6/6, double-hung, wood, sash windows with brick lintels. A one-story porch with Tuscan columns is located on the facade, while the rear ell features an enclosed porch. The only extant secondary resource that was observed from the roadway was the stone chimney stack southwest of the main dwelling. GAI recommended that this resource is not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places; however, VDHR asked GAI to conduct a complete Phase I survey to fully access and survey the property. In 2009, after 519 44 gaining property access, GAI noted a house, chimney stack, meat house, and machine shed were extant. The shed structure was not observed. GIA indicated that the two-and-a-half- story main house was constructed on a continuous-stone foundation, with common-bond brick walls. The side-gable roof is clad with standing-seam metal, and a stepped cornice trims the roofline. Interior brick chimneys mark the gable ends. A one-story, one-bay pedimented portico supported by Tuscan columns and a wood balustrade is located on the facade. The windows have been replaced with 6/6, double-hung, vinyl, sash windows and feature brick jack arches. The two-story rear ell features an enclosed porch and a one-bay garage addition. GAI noted no changes to the remaining chimney stack have occurred since the previous survey. The meat house is located southwest of the main dwelling. It stands one-story tall on a continuous stone foundation. The exterior walls are laid in five- course common bond brick, and a standing-seam metal gable roof tops the building. A stepped cornice trims the roofline, and a recessed door marks the northeast elevation. The modern machine shed, located south of the main dwelling, have a foundation and walls constructed with concrete blocks. A side-gable roof tops the building and is clad with standing-seam metal. Two vehicle doors mark the east elevation, and four-light fixed sash windows comprise the fenestration. After a site visit with full property access, GAI maintained their original recommendation that the site was not potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A, B, and C. GAI indicated that this resource did not demonstrate a clear and definitive association with any significant themes or events. GAI could not locate any information connecting the current owner or previous owners as significant individuals in local or Virginia history. The main dwelling and its associated outbuildings stand as unexceptional examples of common architectural types in the region. Additionally, the secondary residence associated with the chimney stack is no longer standing. However, in 2009, VDHR believed that the resource appears potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and the Virginia Landmark Register under Criteria A and C. The VDHR V-CRIS form currently lists the site as potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places Circa~ identified the house, chimney stack, meat house, and machine shop. Today, the complex is used as a winery, with a small vineyard and outdoor seating areas located around the house. Plates 28 through 36 illustrate the current conditions of the structure. Plate 37 illustrates the viewshed from the project area looking towards the complex and Plates 38 and 39 illustrate the viewshed looking from the complex towards the project area. House The house is a circa 1815, two-story, five-bay, side-gable, Georgian style, common-bond brick house resting on a rusticated stone foundation with two interior-end common-bond brick chimneys with corbelled caps and metal vent caps. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. There is a one-story, one-bay, poured-concrete porch under a front-gable supported by painted-white wood columns with a painted-white wood balustrade. Four poured-concrete steps flanked by painted-white wood railings lead from the porch to the driveway. Sash, double-hung, 6/6, wood-frame windows flanked by painted-black wood shutters are typical on the façade and elevations. The entrance on the façade is a single- leaf, wood-panel door with a transom. There are multiple additions attached to the main house. 520 45 Chimney Stack The chimney stack is a circa 1815, rusticated stone tiered chimney. The building associated with the chimney has been demolished. Meat House The meat house is a circa 1815, one-story, one-bay, front-gable, common-bond brick building resting on a rusticated stone foundation. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the meat house. The entrance on the façade is a single- leaf, vertical wood plank door. Machine Shop The machine shop is a circa 1900, one-story, two-bay, side-gable, concrete-block building resting on a poured-concrete slab-on-grade foundation. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the shop. The entrance on the façade is a single- leaf, wood-panel door with lights. There is also a wooden sliding door on the façade. Plate 28. View of driveway at Site 034-0139, looking north. 521 46 Plate 29. View of main house at Site 034-0139, looking south. Plate 30. View of front of main house at Site 034-0139, looking southeast. 522 47 Plate 31. View of rear of main house at Site 034-0139, looking northeast. Plate 32. View of rear of the main house at Site 039-0139, looking north. 523 48 Plate 33. View of the side of the main house at Site 034-0139, looking east. Plate 34. View of the chimney stack at Site 034-0139, looking west. 524 49 Plate 35. View of meat house at Site 034-0139, looking southwest. Plate 36. View of the machine shop at Site 034-0139, looking southwest. 525 50 Plate 37. View from the Project Area, looking east towards the adjacent house complex at Site 034-0139. Plate 38. View from the edge of the yard at Site 034-0139 towards the Project Area, looking west. 526 51 Plate 39. View of from the yard at Site 034-0139 looking southwest towards the Project Area and Site 034-0077. Probability Model All open, exposed areas were inspected for the presence of artifacts and signs of cultural features. Circa~ did note a cemetery and the remains of a brick structure at the site. In addition, 20 judgmental shovel tests were excavated to sample the stratigraphy of the landforms. Two soil layers were noted on several of the aprons and within the more defined floodplains along Buffalo Marsh Run. A discussion with the landowner indicated that except for the existing cemetery and house foundations, he was unaware of any cultural resources on his property. He indicated that he had not plowed the northern fields and used them for raising cattle and hay production. The southern fields he cultivated every year. The 263.1-acre Project Area consists of a series of upland ridges separated by drainages and swales (Plates 40 through ). The slopes are moderate to steep with large swales noted between the level uplands. The northwestern section of the Project Area consists of an upland ridge with stone outcroppings. Shovel tests revealed one soil stratum under a thick root mat on the uplands. On some of the upland tops and side slopes where the rock outcrops were noted, Stratum A consisted of a dark reddish-brown loamy clay under a thin root mat, 0.22 to 0. 38 feet thick, overlying a reddish-brown clay subsoil. Numerous natural stones were noted within the Stratum A fill. Buffalo Marsh Run is situated just outside of the western edge of the Project Area at the base of the steep slope and then Buffalo Marsh Run runs east to west across the northern section of the Project Area, with the stream flowing to the west. The adjacent floodplains are low and wet, although there are elevated knolls noted at the margins of the upland and 527 52 lowlands. These profiles consisted of a dark reddish-brown loamy silt, 0.48 to 0.61-foot- thick Stratum A, overlying a brownish red silty clay, 0.34 to 0.41-foot-thick Stratum B. Subsoil consisted of a reddish-brown clay. The Phase I survey completed by Thunderbird recorded a Native American site on a similar landform just to the west of the Project Area. The slopes along the streams and the steep slopes were always forested according to the USGS maps. There is one pond and several fresh-water seeps on the property to provide water for the cattle. There are several dirt roads that provide access into the interior section of the project tract. Plate 40. View of the Project Area, looking south. 528 53 Plate 41. View of the rocky outcrops within the western portion of the Project Area, looking north. Plate 42. View of rocky areas with the western Project Area, looking southwest. 529 54 Plate 43. View of Buffalo Marsh Run within the Project Area, looking west. Plate 44. View of previously-surveyed area within the Project Area, looking southeast. 530 55 Plate 45. View of the Project Area, looking northwest. Plate 46. View of the Project Area, looking south. 531 56 Plate 47. Detail view of the Project Area soils on the uplands. Plate 48. View of cultivated fields within the southern portion of the Project Area, looking south. 532 57 Plate 49. View of cultivated field and a fresh-water seep in the southeastern portion of the Project Area, looking south. The project tract contains areas of low, moderate, and high archaeological site probability. According to Circa~’s assessment, areas classified as low-potential are areas of moderate to steep slopes, wetlands, disturbed areas, and poor soil; moderate-potential areas are level landforms that contain somewhat well-drained soils; and high-potential areas are well-drained soils located proximal to water, a source of raw material for tool making, or a source of food, or close to a known historic site. Approximately 25.90 acres were previously surveyed by GAI. Areas of low archaeological potential within the Project Area generally include the stream corridors, steep slopes, wetlands, areas of rock outcrops, the ponded areas, and the lowlands that surround them, gravel roads, and the utility power lines. The 144.1 acres of low-potential areas are found in the settings where independent variables suggest that archaeological sites are unlikely. The low-probability areas will be walked at 50-foot intervals and shovel tested at 10% or greater. Approximately 15 acres are 10% of the low- probability areas and would require roughly 240 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. Moderate potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are moderately likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar landscapes within Frederick County as the Project Area have contained some landforms with level, moderately-drained, moderately- productive soils, and a moderate proximity to surface water sources that contained sites. The 68.3 acres of moderate potential are those that combine the following: relief is 533 58 less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained; and distance to water is greater than 400 feet and no further than 1,000 feet. Within the Project Area, these potential areas consist of broad gentle slopes and uplands that are roughly 500 feet from a water source. In addition, in some areas, these are located on steeper slopes closer to a water source. These areas will be walked and judgmentally shovel tested up to 25% or greater of the area. The areas tested will be located throughout the acreage and will consist of the slightly-elevated landforms above the streams. Shovel test intervals will be at 50- and 25-foot intervals. Approximately 17.1 acres are 25% of the moderate-probability areas and would require roughly 277 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. High potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are very likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar settings within Frederick County as the Project Area contain some landforms with level, well-drained, productive soils, proximity to surface water sources, these are additionally viewed as having high potential for historic and Native American settlement. There were several fresh-water seeps within the project area, and although they are currently used to water the cattle, and are very muddy, these would have been excellent sources of fresh water during the Native American and historic periods. The areas around the seeps are considered high-potential areas. In addition, the landform just to the south and north of the historic Miller house could contain some sites associated with the historic complex as could the landform to the west of the historic structure and around the associated cemetery. The 24.8 acres of high potential are those that combine the following: relief is less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained, the nearest distance to water is 400 feet or less, and areas near known historic sites. Within the development area, the high-potential areas are noted on the center and edges of the uplands and near the drainages and the fresh-water seeps. Survey will cover 100% of these areas and will be at 50- or 25-foot intervals and would require approximately 397 shovel tests. Southern Tract Architectural Resources Three previously-identified architectural resources were located on the project tract and five previously-identified resources are located adjacent to the tract. Previously-Identified Architectural Resources Within the Project Area Site 034-0303 The Battle of Cedar Creek was fought on October 19, 1864 when the Union Army was engaged south of Middletown following their return from Harrisonburg and the burning of the Valley, when they were attacked before dawn by the Confederate Army of Jubal A. Early (Figure 18). Although outnumbered by more than two to one, the Confederates drove the Union Army to a point a mile north of Middletown. Here occurred a fateful pause. At 4 P.M. The Union Army counterattacked and with their vast superiority in numbers, completely routed the Southern Army driving them south beyond Strasburg. Early lost 534 59 some 2,900 men while Sheridan lost 5,665. This battle destroyed the Confederate presence in the Valley. To the end of the war, the Shenandoah Valley would be in Union hands. Figure 18. Battle of Cedar Creek map from the Civil War Preservation Trust. Note that the project area is to the northwest and off this map. The Battlefield Today To help put the current project area into perspective, Circa~ reviewed the current boundaries of the Cedar Creek Battlefield. This circa 1864 Civil War battlefield represents part of Sheridan’s Shenandoah Valley campaign. The CWSAC conducted a Phase I survey of the battlefield in 1993 but did not make any recommendations regarding the National 535 60 Register of Historic Places eligibility. VDHR determined the site potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places in March 2009. In September 2009, the ABPP released their update to the CWSAC report on the nation’s Civil War battlefields. The 2009 update included a study area encompassing approximately 13,995.28 acres (Figure 19). Of that acreage, approximately 12,091.95 acres were recommended as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (see yellow-outlined area on Figure 19). According to the 2009 update, approximately 1,455.12 acres within the battlefield are protected and approximately 410.38 acres are publicly accessible through the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation. The update also noted that Cedar Creek has a unique partnership arrangement. When Cedar Creek became a national park in 2002, its authorizing legislation specified key partners to the park including Belle Grove, Inc., the Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation, and Shenandoah County Parks and Recreation. It went on to note that despite remarkable partnership efforts to protect this nationally-significant landscape, more than 10,000 acres remain at risk. Commercial, residential, and industrial development, including the expansion of a limestone quarry on the battlefield, the proposed widening of Interstate 81, and the proposed construction of a new 500kv transmission line, all illustrate the need for continued and strenuous protection of the Cedar Creek Battlefield. As noted on the map, the southern project area falls partially within the extreme northeastern portion of the study area partially within the area determined potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (see Figure 19). 536 61 Figure 19. 2009 Cedar Creek Battlefield American Battlefield Protection Program (ABPP) map. Plates 50 and 51 show the portion of the battlefield located within the project area. 537 62 Plate 50. View of Site 034-0303, looking north. Plate 51. View of Site 034-0303, looking south. 538 63 Site 034-0419 In 1989, the house was surveyed by Leslie Giles. She identified a circa 1800, one-story, log house, a stable, a smoke/meat house converted to a poultry house, a large bank barn, and an apple storage shed. Ms. Giles described the bank barn clad with vertical siding, gable roof with standing seam metal covering, and three Victorian cupolas. Although she indicated that the structure was a typical evolution of a log building with frame and masonry additions over course of approximately 150 years and a beautiful barn exists in excellent condition, she made no recommendations as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The log structure was later demolished. In 1994, VDHR indicated that the complex was not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The site form currently lists the site as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Circa~ identified the barn, a pole barn, shed, and well. The main house has been demolished and a modern modular home has been erected in its place. Plates 52 through 61 shows the current conditions of the structures at the site. Barn The barn is a circa 1800, one-story, two-bay, side-gable, wood-frame bank barn clad in vertical wood siding and resting on a rusticated stone foundation. The roof is covered in standing seam metal with three cupolas. No windows are visible on the façade. The entrance on the façade is a double-leaf, sliding, vertical wood plan k door. Pole Barn The pole barn is now being used as an apple storage shed. This circa 1800 building is a one-story, seven-bay, side-gable, wood-frame pole barn resting on the ground. The roof is covered in standing seam metal supported by wood posts. The pole barn is open on all sides. There is a one-story, one-bay, shed roof, wood-frame lean-to attached to the side (west) elevation. The lean-to is open on three sides. Shed The shed is a circa 1800, one-story, one-bay, front-gable, wood-frame shed clad in vertical wood siding. Vines have started growing on the building and almost completely cover the façade making it difficult to discern any specific construction details. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the façade. The entrance on the façade is not visible. There is a one-story, one-bay, shed roof lean-to attached to the side (east) elevation. Well The well is a circa 1900, round, poured-concrete well resting slightly above grade and covered with overgrown vegetation. 539 64 Plate 52. View of house with Site 034-0491, looking north. Plate 53. View of the barn complex within Site 034-0491, looking north. 540 65 Plate 54. View of barn with Site 034-0491, looking east. Plate 55. View of barn within Site 034-0491, looking east. 541 66 Plate 56. View of barn within Site 034-0491, looking northwest. Plate 57. View of apple storage shed within Site 034-091, looking northwest. 542 67 Plate 58. View of apple barn within Site 034-0491, looking north. Plate 59. View of apple barn within Site 034-0491, looking south. 543 68 Plate 60. View of shed within Site 034-0491, looking south. Plate 61. View of well within Site 034-0491, looking south. 544 69 Site 034-5075 In 2008, GAI surveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the TrAIL Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted restricted access to the property and their survey was completed from the public-access road. This circa 1880, frame, vernacular dwelling with a two-story rear ell stands on a continuous-stone foundation and is covered with aluminum siding. The house is topped with a side gable roof that is clad in standing- seam metal. The fenestration consists of 2/2, double-hung, wood, sash windows, and the first-floor windows on the facade feature decorative shutters. A modern shed roof porch has been attached to the facade. The porch is built on a pier foundation and features turned- wood posts and a wood balustrade. A one-story, shed roof addition has been appended to the east elevation upon which another one-story, gable roofed addition was attached. Secondary resources included a barn, shed, and an equipment shed. The heavy-timber frame barn is clad in vertical-wood siding and has a gable roof covered with V-crimp metal and features a fore bay on the east elevation. GAI noted a wood framed shed adjacent to the main dwelling. This shed is clad in vertical-wood siding and topped with a standing- seam metal gable front roof. The window apertures remain open. GAI noted that the 1- story vehicle/equipment shed was clad with metal siding and a gable roof, with an attached open shed roof bay to the north elevation. GAI recommended that this resource was not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places; however, VDHR asked GAI to conduct a complete Phase I survey to fully access and survey the property. In 2009, after gaining property access, GAI noted that main house was the same. They further noted that the was constructed on a continuous-stone foundation. Board and batten siding had been applied to the exterior walls, and the side gable roof is clad in standing- seam metal. An earth bank leads to large sliding wood doors on the northwest elevation. Their site visit confirmed that the 1-story wood framed shed was clad in both vertical-wood and board-and-batten siding. The standing-seam metal clad gable front roof is trimmed with exposed rafter tails. The fenestration consisted of 1/1, double-hung, vinyl, sash windows. Their site visit confirmed that the one-story vehicle/equipment shed is clad with three V-crimp metal siding, and the side gable roof is covered with standing-seam metal. A total of eight open bays are located on the facade, including the shed roofed addition on the northeast elevation. After a site visit with full property access, GAI maintained their original recommendation that the site was not potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A, B, and C. However, in 2009, VDHR believed that the resource appears potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and the Virginia Landmark Register under Criteria A and C, with the barn as the primary resource. The site form currently lists the site as potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Circa~ identified the house, barn, and shed. Plates 62 through 68 show the current condition of the structures. The house is almost completely covered in vegetation making it almost impossible to discern any specific construction details. 545 70 Barn The barn is a circa 1880, one-story, two-bay, side-gable, wood-frame barn clad in vertical wood siding. The foundation is not visible. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the façade. The entrance on the façade is a double-leaf, sliding, vertical wood plank door. Shed The shed is a circa 1880, one-story, five-bay, side-gable, wood-frame shed clad in vertical wood siding and resting on the ground. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the shed. The façade is open. Plate 62. View of main house at Site 034-5075, looking southwest. 546 71 Plate 63. View of main house at Site 034-5075, looking west. Plate 64. View of barn and shed at Site 034-5075, looking west. 547 72 Plate 65. View of bank barn at Site 034-5075, looking east. Plate 66. View of bank barn at Site 034-5075, looking northeast. 548 73 Plate 67. View of shed at Site 034-5075, looking south. Plate 68. View of shed at Site 034-5075, looking north. 549 74 Previously-Identified Architectural Resources Adjacent to the Project Area Site 034-0138 The site has a long history of survey by various architectural consultants. In 1966, the State Review Board, in 1973 Michael Quinn, in 1989 Maral Kalbian, in 1996 The Keeping Company, and in 2008 Louis Berger and Associates all reviewed the structure. Vaucluse is a 2-story, three-bay building on a raised-stone basement. It is constructed with Flemish- bond bring on the front and a five-course American-bond brick on the sides and back. It has two large interior brick chimneys. There are flat arches over all the openings. The building has louvered shutters, most of which have been used to board it up. The first-floor windows are full length and have jib doors which are paneled. The roof is hipped with a strong overhang. The eaves now have exposed rafters but appear to have originally been concealed. There are vent windows with original wooden bars in the raised basement. To the rear of the house there is a 1-and-a-1/2-story brick wing. This appears to have originally been the summer kitchen. It also appears that there was originally an open breezeway between the main house and the kitchen which has been enclosed with brick. The 1996 Preliminary Information Form (PIF) contained the following history of the site: The original owners of the property were Lord Fairfax and Yost Hite. Between 1765 and 1778, it was part of a 775-acre tract owned by Lewis Stephens, founder of the present-day Stephens City. Between 1778 and 1782, it was owned by Isaac Zane, revolutionary was patriot and owner of the Marlboro Iron Works. Between 1782 and 1785, the property was owned by Gabriel Jones, the "Vatley Lawyer," one of the first "King's Attorneys" for Frederick County. According to Garland Quarles in his book “Some Old Homes in Frederick County, Virginia”, Jones was "one of the best-known and most influential citizens of the Valley of Virginia during the Colonial period of its history." Jones served in the House of Burgesses for several years and was a friend and political campaigner for George Washington. He served in the Virginia General Assembly, the Continental Congress and the Virginia Constitutional Convention. Jones apparently never had a home at Vauscluse but is thought to have had a law office there, possibly in the building of which nothing remains today but a stone fireplace chimney. Jones sold the 775 acres to his son Strother in 1785. Strother had been a captain in the revolutionary army. He built his home and named it after a spring in Vaucluse France which was the country retreat of Petrarch, a 14th Century poet of courtly love. Strother lived at Vaucluse until his death. In 550 75 1790 and was the first person to be buried in the Jones family cemetery at Vaucluse. The earliest description of Vaucluse that we have is the diary of Rev. Frederick Goodwin, who came to Vaucluse in 1827 as a tutor to the Jones children (the grandchildren of Strother Jones). At that time there was no door on the south side of the house. The entrance was on the north side where a portico was "supported by large round pillars, made rough and white thus presenting the appearance like coarse sand stone." Rev. Goodwin's description of the house, other than the main entrance being on the north rather than the south, seems clearly to fit Vaucluse as it stands today. Descendants of Gabriel and Strother lived at Vaucluse until shortly after the Civil War. The story of the Civil War in the Northern Shenandoah Valley is recounted in the words of the Jones family and their relatives, the Bartons, in “Defend the Valley” by Margaretta Barton Colt. Vaucluse was occupied from time to time during the war by Union troops and ultimately all of the livelitock and crops were destroyed. “Gabriel Jones (1724-1806) and Some of His Descendants”, by Brown, Chappel and Myers contains a facsimile of a sales brochure for Vaucluse thought to date to the 1870's. At that time the "outbuildings for servants, &c., are also built or brick, and are ample in character." These included two tenant houses equal to ordinary farmhouses, stables, blacksmith's and carpenter's shops, a very large and comparatively new barn, and a grist mill "of capacity sufficient for the farm and neighborhood." From 1898 until 1963, the property was owned by the Rice Family of Winchester, first by John Rice and later by his son Warren. In 1963, the survivors of Warren Rice sold the property to John and Betty Chumley. The Chumleys added the building on the site of the former mill as well as all of the buildings listed above that are not associated with the Vaucluse manor house. Mr. Chum1ey passed away in 1984 and his widow sold 128 acres of the 234-acre parcel to the current owners in 1995. Since October 1995, the Chumley- era buildings have been used as a country inn/bed & breakfast.” In 2008, GAI resurveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted that the house underwent a major rehabilitation in circa 1995. The house rises two stories above a 551 76 uncoursed fieldstone foundation. It is constructed of Flemish-bond brick on the south façade and five-course America-bond brick on the remaining elevations. The house is capped with a hipped roof of standing-seam metal with overhanging eaves. It has two interior brick chimneys with corbelled caps. Windows are 12/12 double-hung wood-sash with wood-paneled spandrels on first story of the side elevations (replacing what was jib doors) and 12/12 triple-hung wood-sash windows on the first story of the symmetrically- fenestrated three-bay façade. The second story has 12/8 double-hung wood-sash windows. The centered single-leaf door on the façade features an eight-light transom. All window and door openings have jack-arched brick lintels. A five-bay, 1-story porch has been added to the house since the last survey and has an uncoursed-fieldstone foundation and wood posts and a simple wood balustrade. A 1 1/2-story brick wing is located west of the house and is attached to the main block along its northeast corner. A 1-story wood-frame entrance vestibule and porch are attached to the south elevation of the addition and the east elevation of the main block. The previous surveys and GAI noted several outbuildings on the property, a Gallery, a stone chimney stack, the mill house, the Chumley Homeplace, the Cottage on the Hill, the Cabin by the Pond, a swimming pool, and two sheds. The Gallery building was most likely moved or built on the site circa 1963 by Chumley, who used the building as his first studio. The building appears to incorporate a 1 1/2-story house and a 1-story barn. The barn is connected to the west elevation of the house. Both buildings are clad in weatherboard and have side gable, wood-shingle roofs. The house has a steeply-pitched roof with overhanging, spayed eaves that incorporated a full-width front porch. An exterior-end brick chimney is located on the east elevation. The house has 6/6 wood-sash windows and gabled dormers that hold 4/4 wood-sash windows. The south elevation of the house has an off-set single-leaf door. The barn has a triangular hay hood on its west elevation. The south elevation features a multi-light bay window. To the west of the house are the ruins of an outbuilding. All that remains is a large stone chimney with an interior fireplace. This appears to date earlier than the main house. The “Mill House Studio” is sited on Vaucluse Spring. According to current owners, the building was rebuilt on the foundation of the historic Vaucluse Mill house and used as Chumley’s second art studio. The building has a raised, uncoursed stone foundation. The two-story building is clad in weatherboard and has a gable roof of standing-seam metal with and ogee cornice and cornice returns. An interior brick chimney with a corbelled cap rises above the roof. Windows are 6/6 double-hung wood-sash. The Chumley Homeplace was built circa 1820 and was also moved to its current site in 1963 by John Chumley. It is a two-story building that has been clad in weatherboard siding and topped with a side gable roof. Wood shingles comprise the roofing material, and a stone chimney marks the gable end. The fenestration consists of 6/6 double- hung wood sash windows. A 1-story screened-in porch with a shed roof has been attached to the east elevation. Multiple 1-story additions have been appended to the house on the north, south, and east elevations. Built circa 2007, the “Cottage on the Hill” is a one-story wood-frame building set on a solid foundation clad in an uncoursed, rubble-stone veneer. The building is clad in weatherboard and is capped with a side gable standing-seam metal roof with a louvered ridge ventilator. A 1-story bay projects from the south elevation. Windows are 6/6 wood-sash. The façade has two single-leaf doors. Constructed circa 1850, the one story “Cabin by the Pond” was a former tobacco barn, according to the current 552 77 owners and was moved to the site. It sits on an uncoursed-stone foundation and is constructed of hewn logs. It has a side gable, standing-seam metal roof. A 1-story, wood- frame bay projects from the west elevation and is clad in weatherboard. Windows are 6/6 wood-sash. A 1-story shed porch fronts the building and shelters a single leaf door. The porch has wood posts. A circa 1990 swimming pool. The circa 1990 shed is located north of the mill. It is a one-story, wood-frame building with a concrete-block foundation. The walls are covered in what appears to be composition siding. It has a gambrel, asphalt shingle roof. A shed overhang is located on its east elevation. A circa 1990 1-story wood- frame shed is located adjacent to the pool, along its west side. It sits on a rubble-stone foundation and its exterior walls are clad in what appears to be composition siding. It has a pyramidal roof of wood shingles. GAI indicated that this property historically served as the site of a mill. However, it currently functions as a bed and breakfast. Since the property has lost the integrity of its original function, and since no evidence could be located that supports historic significance, they recommended this resource ineligible for listing under Criterion A. Although the artist John Chumley resided on this property and used it as his studio, it is not the most significant resource associated with his life. As such, the Inn at Vaucluse Spring is not recommended eligible for National Register Historic Places listing under Criterion B. The VDHR concluded that this resource is eligible for NRHP listing under Criterion C in 1996. The buildings associated with this property have not lost integrity and continue to convey their architectural significance. In addition, although some of the buildings on the property have been moved from their original locations, under Criteria Consideration B, as long as these buildings are significant solely for their architectural value, they can still be considered eligible for listing on the NRHP. As such, The Inn at Vaucluse Spring is still recommended eligible for listing under Criterion C. VDHR concurred that the recommendations for listing appears to be still valid in 2009 based on data provided for this project. VDHR suggested that current Phase II data would be needed to confirm and determine whether other National Register of Historic Places criteria apply, due to the passage of time. No additional determination of eligibility made by VDHR staff in 2009. The site form currently lists the site as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Plates 69 through 81 show the current conditions of the structures at the site. 553 78 Plate 69. View of house at Site 034-0138, looking southwest. Plate 70. View of house at Site 034-0138, looking west. 554 79 Plate 71. View of house at Site 034-0138, looking west. Plate 72. View of house at Site 034-0138, looking west. 555 80 Plate 73. View of chimney at Site 034-0138, looking west. Plate 74. View of secondary house at Site 034-0138, looking north. 556 81 Plate 75. View of Site 034-0138, looking north. Plate 76. View of mill at Site 034-0138, looking north. 557 82 Plate 77. View of shed by mill at Site 034-0138, looking east. Plate 78. View of house and swimming pool at Site 034-0138, looking north. 558 83 Plate 79. View of gallery at Site 034-0138, looking north. Plate 80. View of gallery at Site 034-0138, looking northwest. 559 84 Plate 81. View of outbuilding at gallery at Site 034-0138, looking north. Site 034-0238 In 1989, the house was surveyed by Maral Kalbian. She identified a circa 1875 1-story, wood-frame church and a concrete-block shed. She made no recommendations as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The site form currently lists the site as not evaluated for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Plates 82 through 87 show the current conditions of the structure. 560 85 Plate 82. View of Site 034-0238, looking northeast. Plate 83. View of Site 034-0238, looking north. 561 86 Plate 84. View of Site 034-0238, looking north. 562 87 Plate 85. View of Site 034-0238, looking south. Plate 86. View of Site 034-0238, looking southeast. 563 88 Plate 87. View of shed Site 034-0238, looking northeast. Site 034-0239 In 1989, the house was surveyed by Maral Kalbian. She identified a circa 1870 2-story main house, a remolded smokehouse, a frame barn, and a two-bay, concrete-block garage. She made no recommendations as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The site form currently lists the site as not evaluated for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Plates 88 through 94 show the current conditions of the project area. 564 89 Plate 88. View of house at Site 034-0239, looking northwest. Plate 89. View of house at Site 034-0239, looking north. 565 90 Plate 90. View of house at Site 034-0239, looking northeast. Plate 91. View of house at Site 034-0239, looking west. 566 91 Plate 92. View of garage and barn at Site 034-0239, looking north. Plate 93. View of barn at Site 034-0239, looking west. 567 92 Plate 94. View of from the edge of Site 034-0239 looking east towards the Site 034-0138. Site 034-0263 In 1989, the house was surveyed by Maral Kalbian. She identified a circa 1880 3-bay main house, a circa 1940 timber-frame board-and-batten shed with a gable roof, a 1930 two-bay timber-frame garage with a gable roof, and a modern garage. She made no recommendations as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. In 2008, GAI surveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted restricted access to the property and their survey was completed from the public-access road. GAI noted that the 2-story house has a side gable roof, is situated on a continuous-stone foundation with vinyl siding. The roofing material consists of standing-seam metal, and a central chimney pierces the roof at the ridgeline. The fenestration consists of 6/6 double-hung vinyl sash windows with fixed shutters. The 1-story, three-bay open porch stands on a pier foundation with lattice skirting with turned wood posts and a wood balustrade. A 2-story ell projects from the rear of the building. GAI noted a 1-story, wood framed shed stands just north of the house. It stands on a concrete block pier foundation, is clad in vertical-wood siding, and is topped with a shed roof. The roof is covered with standing-seam metal and trimmed with exposed rafter tails. Two garages stand slightly southwest of the main dwelling. A two-bay modern garage is clad in vertical-wood siding and features two rolling vehicle doors. It is topped with a gable front roof covered with standing-seam metal. Adjacent to this garage is a one-bay wood framed garage. This garage has vertical-wood siding, a gable roof, and a set of large hinged double doors. 568 93 GAI recommended that the house lacks historical significance and they could not locate any information to associate the dwelling with significant historic events at the local, state, or national levels. Therefore, they recommended the dwelling is not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A. To date, no connection between the house and the life or activities of a person important in local, national, or regional history could be identified. As such, it is recommended not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion B. The dwelling does not possess significant architectural features and does not represent the work of a master. Therefore, this resource is recommended ineligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion C. In 2009, VDHR concurred with their recommendation. The site form currently lists the site as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Plates 95 through 99 show the current condition of the structures. Plate 95. View of Site 034-0263, looking southwest. 569 94 Plate 96. View of outbuildings at Site 034-0263, looking southwest. Plate 97. View of shed at Site 034-0263, looking west. 570 95 Plate 98. View of garage and shed at Site 034-0263, looking southwest. Plate 99. View of garage and shed at Site 034-0263, looking west. 571 96 Site 034-0264 In 1991, the house was surveyed by Maral Kalbian. She identified a circa 1870 3-bay main house, a circa 1940 timber-frame, vertical-board siding, gable roof garage, a circa 1900 timber-frame, shed roof, vertical-board siding privy, a 1930 shed, a 1920 small, timber frame, vertical matchboard siding, gable roof shed, a 1910 timber-frame, vertical-board siding, gable standing-seam metal roof, square cupola with pyramidal roof cape barn, and a circa 1940 timber-frame, long and low, shed roof chicken house. She made no recommendations as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. In 2008, GAI surveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted restricted access to the property and their survey was completed from the public-access road. GAI noted that the circa 1870 2-story frame vernacular dwelling was built on a continuous-stone foundation. The exterior walls are weatherboard and trimmed with corner boards and a standing-seam metal covers the side gable roof. The fenestration throughout consists of 2/2 double-hung, wood sash windows with wood window surrounds. A one-story, three-bay open porch s located on the facade. The porch is constructed on a brick-pier foundation and features Tuscan columns with a wood balustrade. The one-story, gable roofed garage is clad in vertical-wood siding and is covered with a standing-seam metal roof trimmed with exposed rafter tails. A large vehicle entrance marks the southeast elevation, but the door had been removed. GAI noted that the garage was used for storage and had begun to deteriorate. GAI noted that the privy was not observed from the public right-of-way. GAI noted that adjacent to the barn is the one-story wood framed shed that is clad in weatherboard siding. It has a gable roof with standing-seam metal and a shed roof addition on the west elevation. GAI noted that the shed was in poor condition. The tool shed is a wood-framed building that has vertical-wood siding and a gable front roof covered with rolled asphalt. A hinged wooden door provides access on the facade, and the fenestration consists of six-light fixed sash windows. GAI noted no changes appeared to have occurred since the previous survey was conducted on the barn. GAI noted that the chicken coop is set back on the property and is difficult to view from the public right-of-way. It appeared to be clad in vertical-board siding with 6/6 double-hung wood sash windows. GAI recommended that this resource did not clearly reflect the nature and extent of agricultural practices of Frederick County in the late 19th or early 20th centuries. They suggested that numerous other area farms retain more and better representative examples of agricultural outbuildings from the time period. Therefore, the Shiley Farm is recommended not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A. GAI could not connect this property to any significant individuals in local or state history. As such, this resource was recommended ineligible for listing for the National Register of Historic Places listing under Criterion B. The main house stands as a typical example of a commonly-found architectural form in the region. The domestic and agricultural outbuildings do not possess the requisite architectural significance for listing and were not constructed using any specialized techniques. Therefore, GAI recommended the Shiley Farm not eligible for listing for the National Register of Historic Places listing 572 97 under Criterion C. VDHR asked GAI to conduct a complete Phase I survey to fully access and survey the property. In 2009, after gaining property access, GAI noted that the weatherboard siding was removed but had not yet been replaced on the main house. In addition, many of the 2/2 double-hung wood sash windows have been replaced with 1/1 double-hung vinyl sash windows. GAI also noted that there are two interior brick chimneys with corbelled caps, as well as cornice returns on the eaves. GAI confirmed that the privy is no longer extant. GAI indicated that although no changes have occurred to this shed since the previous survey. However, it should be noted that the windows have all been boarded over except for the fixed sash window in the gable end. Also, the shed roof addition is clad in vertical wood siding and features a sliding wood vehicle door. GAI noted no changes to the tool shed have occurred since the previous survey. GAI noted that the 2-story barn is constructed on a parged foundation. The exterior walls are clad with vertical-wood siding and standing- seam metal covers the side gable roof. A cupola with louvered vents and a pyramidal roof is centrally located at the roof ridgeline. An overhanging forebay marks the facade and shelters four open bays. GAI noted that the poultry house is situated west of the main dwelling. It is a 1-story, wood-framed building constructed on a poured-concrete foundation. Vertical-wood siding covers the exterior walls. A shed roof tops the poultry house and is clad in standing- seam metal. The fenestration consists of 6/6 double-hung wood sash windows. However, many of the windows no longer have glass panes, but are instead covered with chicken wire. A shed roof addition on the southwest elevation has collapsed. After a site visit with full property access, GAI maintained their original recommendation that the site was not potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A, B, and C. However, in 2009, VDHR believed that the resource appeared potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and the Virginia Landmark Register under Criteria A and C. The site form currently lists the site as potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Plates 100 through 103 show the current condition of the structures. 573 98 Plate 100. View of house at Site 034-0264, looking west. Plate 101. View of house at Site 034-0264, looking west. 574 99 Plate 102. View of barn at Site 034-0264, looking west. Plate 103. View of garage at Site 034-0264, looking west. 575 100 Probability Model All open, exposed areas were inspected for the presence of artifacts and signs of cultural features. In addition, 22 judgmental shovel tests were excavated to sample the stratigraphy of the landforms. Two soil layers were noted on several of the aprons and within the more defined floodplains along Buffalo Marsh Run. A discussion with the landowner indicated that he was unaware of any cultural resources on his property. The Project Area consists of a series of upland ridges separated by drainages and swales (Plates 104 through ). The slopes are moderate to steep with large swales noted between the level uplands. The project area was historically used as an apple orchard that has now been converted to cropland or, where rock outcroppings are present, pasture or forested lands on the steep slopes. The trees were planted roughly eight feet apart in rows roughly eight feet apart. The trees were eventually cut, and the stumps were removed via a backhoe sometime after1997. This clearing activity created disturbance to the soil in the fields in this area. Crops are now planted in the converted apple orchards in the southern, western, and eastern sections of the project area. Mature apple orchards are planted along the western boundary and the north western boundaries of the project area. The remaining acreage is used as pasture for livestock. The northern section of the Project Area consists of an upland ridge with stone outcroppings. Shovel tests revealed one soil stratum under a thin root mat on the uplands. On some of the upland tops and side slopes where the rock outcrops were noted, Stratum A consisted of a dark reddish-brown loamy clay under a thin root mat, 0.20 to 0. 34 feet thick, overlying a reddish-brown clay subsoil. Numerous natural stones were noted within the Stratum A fill. Meadow Brooks is situated to the east of the Project Area with a tributary draining the upper northern area and a tributary draining the southern project area. The northern tributary has been dammed for a pond. The adjacent floodplains are low and wet, although there are elevated knolls noted at the margins of the upland and lowlands. These profiles consisted of a dark reddish-brown loamy silt, 0.48 to 0.61-foot-thick Stratum A, overlying a brownish red silty clay, 0.34 to 0.41-foot-thick Stratum B. Subsoil consisted of a reddish- brown clay. The Phase I survey completed by GAI did not record any archaeological resources within the project tract. The slopes along steep slopes in the northwestern section of the project area were always forested according to the USGS maps. This area had been recently clear cut of the timber. There is one pond and several fresh-water seeps on the property to provide water for the cattle. There are several dirt roads that provide access into the interior section of the project tract. The 294.3-acre project tract contains areas of low, moderate, and high archaeological site probability. According to Circa~’s assessment, areas classified as low-potential are areas of moderate to steep slopes, wetlands, disturbed areas, and poor soil; moderate-potential areas are level landforms that contain somewhat well-drained soils; and high-potential areas are well-drained soils located proximal to water, a source of raw material for tool making, or a source of food, or close to a known historic site. Approximately 20.90 acres are located within the previous surveyed areas and will not be re-surveyed. Approximately 576 101 129.8 acres were originally part of an apple orchard. The trees were cut down and the stumps removed by heavy equipment, then the area smoothed and cultivated in crops. The previous development at the site would preclude any intact archaeological resources in these areas. Areas of low archaeological potential within the Project Area generally include the stream corridors, steep slopes, wetlands, areas of rock outcrops, the ponded areas, and the lowlands that surround them, gravel roads, and the utility power lines. The 57.2 acres of low-potential areas are found in the settings where independent variables suggest that archaeological sites are unlikely. The low-probability areas will be walked at 50-foot intervals and shovel tested at 10% or greater. Approximately 5.7 acres are 10% of the low- probability areas and would require roughly 91.2 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. Moderate potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are moderately likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar landscapes within Frederick County as the Project Area have contained some landforms with level, moderately-drained, moderately- productive soils, and a moderate proximity to surface water sources that contained sites. The 75.5 acres of moderate potential are those that combine the following: relief is less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained; and distance to water is greater than 400 feet and no further than 1,000 feet. Within the Project Area, these potential areas consist of broad gentle slopes and uplands that are roughly 500 feet from a water source. In addition, in some areas, these are located on steeper slopes closer to a water source. These areas will be walked and judgmentally shovel tested up to 25% or greater of the area. The areas tested will be located throughout the acreage and will consist of the slightly-elevated landforms above the streams and on the uplands. Shovel test intervals will be at 50- and 25-foot intervals. Approximately 18.8 acres are 25% of the moderate-probability areas and would require roughly 300 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. High potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are very likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar settings within Frederick County as the Project Area contain some landforms with level, well-drained, productive soils, proximity to surface water sources, these are additionally viewed as having high potential for historic and Native American settlement. There were several fresh-water seeps within the project area, and although they are currently used to water the cattle, and are very muddy, these would have been excellent sources of fresh water during the Native American and historic periods. The areas around the seeps are considered high-potential areas. The 10.9 acres of high potential are those that combine the following: relief is less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained, the nearest distance to water is 400 feet or less, and areas near known historic sites. Within the development area, the high-potential areas are noted on the center and edges of the uplands and near the drainages and the fresh-water seeps. Survey will cover 100% of these areas and will be at 50- or 25-foot intervals and would 577 102 require approximately 162 shovel tests. In addition, metal detecting will be completed on the portion of the project area within the battlefield boundaries. An architectural survey is recommended on all structures 45-years old or older within a half-mile buffer of the Project Areas. A drive through of this area indicates several 18th and 19th century structures and early-to mid-20th century structures within the half-mile buffer. Plate 104. View of converted agricultural fields within the southern portion of the Project Area, looking north. 578 103 Plate 105. View of converted fields within the southern portion of the Project Area, looking northwest. Plate 106. View of converted fields within the central section of the Project Area, looking northwest. 579 104 Plate 107. View of converted fields in the central section of the Project Area, looking west. Plate 108. View of the converted fields and the exisiting apple orchard in the western section of the Project Area, looking west. 580 105 Plate 109. View of the apple orchard in the western portion of the Project Area, looking south. Plate 110. View of a fresh-water seep, looking north. 581 106 Plate 111. View of a pond within the Project Area, looking north. Plate 112. View of the fields within the Project Area, looking west. 582 107 Plate 113. View of rock outcrops within the field of the Project Area, looking northeast. Plate 114. View of the Project Area, looking north. 583 108 Plate 115. View of rock outcrops within the Project Area, looking north. Plate 116. View of the fields within the Project Area, looking northeast. 584 109 Plate 117. View of the northwestern apple orchard with the Project Area, looking north. Plate 118. View of the fields and ponds within the Project Area, looking southwest. 585 110 Plate 119. View of floodplain along the northern tributary to Meadow Brook within the Project Area, looking east. Plate 120. View of the flood plain at the northern tributary to Meadow Brook within the Project Area, looking south. 586 111 Plate 121. View of the Project Area, looking east. Plate 122. View of recently timbered area near the northwestern corner of the Project Area, looking south. 587 112 consisted of a dark reddish-brown loamy silt, 0.48 to 0.61-foot-thick Stratum A, overlying a brownish red silty clay, 0.34 to 0.41-foot-thick Stratum B. Subsoil consisted of a reddish- brown clay. The Phase I survey completed by GAI did not record any archaeological resources within the project tract. The slopes along steep slopes in the northwestern section of the project area were always forested according to the USGS maps. This area had been recently clear cut of the timber. There is one pond and several fresh-water seeps on the property to provide water for the cattle. There are several dirt roads that provide access into the interior section of the project tract. The 294.3-acre project tract contains areas of low, moderate, and high archaeological site probability. According to Circa~’s assessment, areas classified as low-potential are areas of moderate to steep slopes, wetlands, disturbed areas, and poor soil; moderate-potential areas are level landforms that contain somewhat well-drained soils; and high-potential areas are well-drained soils located proximal to water, a source of raw material for tool making, or a source of food, or close to a known historic site. Approximately 20.90 acres are located within the previous surveyed areas and will not be re-surveyed. Approximately 129.8 acres were originally part of an apple orchard. The trees were cut down and the stumps removed by heavy equipment, then the area smoothed and cultivated in crops. The previous development at the site would preclude any intact archaeological resources in these areas. Areas of low archaeological potential within the Project Area generally include the stream corridors, steep slopes, wetlands, areas of rock outcrops, the ponded areas, and the lowlands that surround them, gravel roads, and the utility power lines. The 57.2 acres of low-potential areas are found in the settings where independent variables suggest that archaeological sites are unlikely. The low-probability areas will be walked at 50-foot intervals and shovel tested at 10% or greater. Approximately 5.7 acres are 10% of the low- probability areas and would require roughly 91.2 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. Moderate potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are moderately likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar landscapes within Frederick County as the Project Area have contained some landforms with level, moderately-drained, moderately- productive soils, and a moderate proximity to surface water sources that contained sites. The 75.5 acres of moderate potential are those that combine the following: relief is less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained; and distance to water is greater than 400 feet and no further than 1,000 feet. Within the Project Area, these potential areas consist of broad gentle slopes and uplands that are roughly 500 feet from a water source. In addition, in some areas, these are located on steeper slopes closer to a water source. These areas will be walked and judgmentally shovel tested up to 25% or greater of the area. The areas tested will be located throughout the acreage and will consist of the slightly-elevated landforms above the streams and on the uplands. Shovel test intervals will be at 50- and 25-foot intervals. Approximately 18.8 acres are 25% of the moderate-probability areas and would require roughly 300 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. 588 113 High potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are very likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar settings within Frederick County as the Project Area contain some landforms with level, well-drained, productive soils, proximity to surface water sources, these are additionally viewed as having high potential for historic and Native American settlement. There were several fresh-water seeps within the project area, and although they are currently used to water the cattle, and are very muddy, these would have been excellent sources of fresh water during the Native American and historic periods. The areas around the seeps are considered high-potential areas. The 10.9 acres of high potential are those that combine the following: relief is less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained, the nearest distance to water is 400 feet or less, and areas near known historic sites. Within the development area, the high-potential areas are noted on the center and edges of the uplands and near the drainages and the fresh-water seeps. Survey will cover 100% of these areas and will be at 50- or 25-foot intervals and would require approximately 162 shovel tests. In addition, metal detecting will be completed on the portion of the project area within the battlefield boundaries. An architectural survey is recommended on all structures 45-years old or older within a half-mile buffer of the Project Areas. A drive through of this area indicates several 18th and 19th century structures and early-to mid-20th century structures within the half-mile buffer. . 589 114 Attachments: Photo, Shovel Test, and Probability Maps 590 PRELIMINARY SITE PLANS PREPARED BY TIMMONS GROUP 1 OF 6 L. WHEELER ---- COVER SHEET TIMMONS GROUP1001 BOULDERS PARKWAY SUITE 300RICHMOND, VA 23225PHONE: (804) 200-6446FAX: (804) 560-1016 YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. APRIL 17, 2020 URBAN GRID SOLAR337 LOG CANOE CIRCLESTEVENSVILLE, MD 21666PHONE: (410) 604-3603 FREDERICK COUNTY, VA FOXGLOVE SOLAR, LLC SOLAR ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION FACILITY VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1" = 2,000' NA D 8 3 YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. ENGINEERDEVELOPER Sheet List Table Sheet Number Sheet Title 1 COVER SHEET 2 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN 3 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN - INSET 4 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN - INSET 5 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN - NOTES & DETAILSPROJECT AREA Y: \ 8 5 2 \ 8 4 0 \ 4 1 1 4 7 - F o x g l o v e _ S o l a r \ D W G \ C U P \ 4 1 1 4 7 - C O V E R . d w g | P l o t t e d o n 4 / 1 7 / 2 0 2 0 1 : 4 9 P M | b y L a u r e n W h e e l e r DRAWING DESCRIPTION REVISIONS MM/DD/YY DESCRIPTION# PROJECT NAME & ADDRESS PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER DATE DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY SCALE SHEET NUMBER CLIENT YO U R V I S I O N A C H I E V E D T H R O U G H O U R S . 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 | R i c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 F A X 8 0 4 . 5 6 0 . 1 0 1 6 w w w . t i m m o n s . c o m TH I S D R A W I N G P R E P A R E D A T T H E CO R P O R A T E O F F I C E These plans and associated documents are the exclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of TIMMONS GROUP. PLANS PRINTED AS 11x17 ARE HALF SCALE 04/17/2020 FOXGLOVE SOLAR, LLC 41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R PR O J E C T FO X G L O V E S O L A R , LL C FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y VI R G I N I A FOXGLOVE SOLAR, LLC 337 LOG CANOE CIRCLE STEVENSVILLE, MD 21666 (410)604-3603 APPROVED BY FREDERICK COUNTY ZONINGADMINISTRATOR ON ____________________,20____. SITE PLAN VALID FOR FIVE (5) YEARSFROM APPROVAL DATE. ______________________________________FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR PROJECT AREA ACREAGE: 668.5 ACRESLATITUDE: 39.084214LONGITUDE: -78.279810WATERSHED: NORTH FORK SHENANDOAHHYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE: 02070006 6 PRIME FARMLAND MAP 591 Y:\852\840\41147 - Foxglove_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-CUP_Overall.mxd 2 3 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ^_ ^_ ^_ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ HITES VIEW ESTATES S t r o s n i d e r L n (2 5 M P H ) Marlboro R d (5 5 MP H ) C l a r k R d (2 5 M P H ) H i t e s R d (2 5 M P H ) Middl e R d C o r a L n New e l l D r Vall e y P i k e I n e z L n Ci d e r M ill W a yOakHillDr Ge m D r NewellDr Ge r m a n y R d Va ucl u s e S p r i n g L n B u f f a l o M a r sh R d N i t t a n y S o uth W a y Vaucl u s e R d Co n e s t o g a L n Tuc k a h o e L n CarsonLn Westernview Dr 50' 50' 50' 50 ' 50 ' 50' 60 ' 60' 60' 60 ' 60 ' 60' 60' 100' 10 0 ' 100 ' 10 0 ' 100 ' 100 ' 10 0 ' 100 ' 200' 200' 200 ' 200 ' 200' Legend Proposed Features Project Limits - 668.5 Acres ^_Project Entrance D D D Fence ÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍInternal Roads Laydown Yard Substation Solar Panels Vegetative Screening Proposed 10 Foot Vegetative Screening Existing 50 Foot Mature Woodland Constraints Setbacks - 50' / 60' / 100' / 200' Existing Features Road Centerline ! !Transmission Line Streams Wetlands Woodlands Steep Slopes (Greater than 15%) 1% Annual Flood Hazard Agricultural and Forest District Frederick County Tax Parcels DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE 2 OF 6 DATE 04/17/2020 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME L. WHEELER FOXGLOVE SOLAR 1 " = 650 'H: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION These exhibits and associated documents are the exclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R P R O J E C T FO X G L O V E S O L A R , L L C FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , VI R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE 0 650 1,300 SCALE (FEET) FOXGLOVE SOLAR, LLC 337 LOG CANOE CIRCLE STEVENSVILLE, MD 21666 (410) 604-3603 NOTES: 1. PROJECT AREA IS APPROXIMATE. 2. SETBACK LINES ARE 60 FEET FROM ADJACENT RIGHT OF WAYS, 50 FEET FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WTIH PARCELS LESS THAN 6 ACRES, 100 FEET FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITH PARCELS GREATER THAN 6 ACRES, AND 200 FEET FROM ADJACENT AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST DISTRICT PARCELS GREATER THAN 6 ACRES. 3. LANDSCAPING IS 10 FEET ALL AROUND EXCEPT WHERE 50 FEET OF MATURE WOODLAND IS EXISTING. 4. PRIMARY ZONING DISTRICT AND USE OF EACH PARCEL COMPRISING PROJECT AREA IS RA. 5. ALL PARCELS ARE LOCATED IN THE BACK CREEK MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. 6. WETLANDS ARE SOURCED FROM NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY. 7. STREAMS ARE SOURCED FROM NATIONAL HYDROGRAPHY DATASET. 8. FLOOD HAZARD DATA SOURCED FROM FEMA. 9. WOODLANDS GENERATED FROM NATIONAL LAND COVER DATASET AND AERIAL IMAGERY DIGITIZATION. 10. STEEP SLOPES GENERATED FROM VGIN LIDAR. 11. TOTAL LAND AREA OF SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 668.5 ACRES. 12. TOTAL PROPOSED LAND AREA TO BE DEVELOPED IS 370.1 ACRES. 13. PROJECT LIMITS LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN KARST BEDROCK. NO KNOWN KARST FEATURES ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA.592 Y:\852\840\41147 - Foxglove_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-CUP_Detail.mxd 2 3 ÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ^_ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ HITES VIEW ESTATES IDENTIFIER PIN OWNER NAME ZONE GIS ACREAGE USE1 73 A 21 WOODBINE FARMS INC RA 263.1 VACANT2 73 A 31 WOODBINE FARMS INC RA 84.1 VACANT3 73 A 20 BAUSERMAN CHARLES C RA 238.8 VACANT4 84 A 1 MCDONALD ALBERT A TRUST RA 207.6 VACANT W/ MOBILE HOME5 84 A 40A SNAPP ALFRED L JR RA 44.4 DWELLING6 84 A 40 SNAPP ALFRED L & SON INC RA 69.5 DWELLING7 84 A 41 REDMILES DONALD R RA 6.1 DWELLING8 84 A 44 RIDINGS L VERNON RESIDUAL TRUST RA 50.3 VACANT9 84 A 46 KAHN LLC RA 60.3 VACANT W/ MOBILE HOME10 84 8 2 22 MOUNTAIN VISTA LLC RA 2 VACANT11 84 8 2 21 MOUNTAIN VISTA LLC RA 2 VACANT12 84 8 2 20 MOUNTAIN VISTA LLC RA 2.1 VACANT13 84 8 2 19 ROBINSON JASON & JENNIFER J RA 2.9 DWELLING14 84 8 2 15 RIDGEWAY CHARLES A & LAURA S RA 2.6 DWELLING15 84 8 2 14 MOUNTAIN VISTA LLC RA 2.5 VACANT16 84 8 2 13 YOUNG BILLY M & BILLIE P RA 5.4 VACANT17 73 A 30N CAMPBELL TROY J RA 5.5 DWELLING18 73 A 30D NEWCOME PHILIP E RA 17.7 DWELLING19 73 A 30O ANDERSON SHIRLEY K RA 51.2 VACANT20 73 A 30C CARBAUGH CLAYTON S RA 2.1 DWELLING Clark Rd(25 M P H) M a r lboro Rd(55MPH) H i t e s R d (2 5 M P H ) Middl e R d Ge m D r O a k H i l l D r Ge r m a n y R d Car s o n L n 2 1920 3 1 18 9 8 5 7 6 4 17 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 50' 50 ' 60 ' 100' 10 0 ' 100 ' 10 0 ' 200' 200' 200 ' 200' FLOW Legend Proposed Features Project Limits - 668.5 Acres ^_Project Entrance D D D Fence ÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍInternal Roads Laydown Yard Substation Panels Vegetative Screening Proposed 10 Foot Vegetative Screening Existing 50 Foot Mature Woodland Constraints Setbacks - 50' / 60' / 100' / 200' Existing Features ! !Transmission Line Streams Wetlands Woodlands Steep Slopes (Greater than 15%) Existing Structures 1% Annual Flood Hazard Agricultural and Forest District Frederick County Tax Parcels Topographic Contours 10 Foot 5 Foot DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE 3 OF 6 DATE 04/17/2020 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME L. WHEELER FOXGLOVE SOLAR 1 " = 350 'H: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION These exhibits and associated documents are the exclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R P R O J E C T FO X G L O V E S O L A R , L L C FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , VI R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE 0 350 700 SCALE (FEET) FOXGLOVE SOLAR, LLC 337 LOG CANOE CIRCLE STEVENSVILLE, MD 21666 (410) 604-3603 NOTES: 1. PROJECT AREA IS APPROXIMATE. 2. SETBACK LINES ARE 60 FEET FROM ADJACENT RIGHT OF WAYS, 50 FEET FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WTIH PARCELS LESS THAN 6 ACRES, 100 FEET FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITH PARCELS GREATER THAN 6 ACRES, AND 200 FEET FROM ADJACENT AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST DISTRICT PARCELS GREATER THAN 6 ACRES. 3. LANDSCAPING IS 10 FEET ALL AROUND EXCEPT WHERE 50 FEET OF MATURE WOODLAND IS EXISTING. 4. PRIMARY ZONING DISTRICT AND USE OF EACH PARCEL COMPRISING PROJECT AREA IS RA. 5. ALL PARCELS ARE LOCATED IN THE BACK CREEK MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. 6. WETLANDS ARE SOURCED FROM NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY. 7. STREAMS ARE SOURCED FROM NATIONAL HYDROGRAPHY DATASET. 8. FLOOD HAZARD DATA SOURCED FROM FEMA. 9. WOODLANDS GENERATED FROM NATIONAL LAND COVER DATASET AND AERIAL IMAGERY DIGITIZATION. 10. STEEP SLOPES GENERATED FROM VGIN LIDAR. 11. TOTAL LAND AREA OF SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 668.5 ACRES. 12. TOTAL PROPOSED LAND AREA TO BE DEVELOPED IS 370.1 ACRES. 13. PROJECT LIMITS LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN KARST BEDROCK. NO KNOWN KARST FEATURES ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA.593 Y:\852\840\41147 - Foxglove_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-CUP_Detail.mxd 2 3 ÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ ÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D DDDDDDDDDDDDDD D D D D DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD D D D D ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ^_ ^_ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ ˡ 16' 31' 55' 64 ' 70 ' 84' 90' 92' 109 ' 190' 460 ' 683 ' 871 ' 57' 164' 0' IDENTIFIER PIN OWNER NAME ZONE GIS ACREAGE USE1 73 A 21 WOODBINE FARMS INC RA 261.8 VACANT5 84 A 40A SNAPP ALFRED L JR RA 44.4 DWELLING6 84 A 40 SNAPP ALFRED L & SON INC RA 69.1 DWELLING7 84 A 41 REDMILES DONALD R RA 6.1 DWELLING21 84 A 50 WOODBINE FARMS INC RA 197.4 DWELLING22 84 A 29 WOODBINE FARMS INC RA 96.8 VACANT W/ MOBILE HOME23 84 A 28A BENTLEY CHARLES A RA 34.2 DWELLING24 84 A 53 LINSCOMB DAVID S RA 81 VACANT25 84 A 51 BRITNER PAUL W RA 26.5 DWELLING26 84 A 49E MCDONALD JASON A RA 5.2 DW MOBILE HOME27 84 A 49 STROSNIDER TILDEN E JR RA 162 VACANT28 84 A 49B MCDONALD ROY E RA 10.3 VACANT29 84 A 49G MCDONALD ROY E & LORETTA G RA 5.2 VACANT30 84 A 42 STROSNIDER TILDEN E JR RA 9.9 VACANT31 84 A 42D STROSNIDER TILDEN E JR RA 1.7 VACANT32 84 A 42B MANUEL DAVID M RA 1.5 DWELLING33 84 A 42A RAMEY WADE RA 6.5 DWELLING34 84 A 42C HOOVER WAYNE C RA 1.7 DWELLING35 84 A 39 GORE LEVI J RA 1.5 DWELLING36 84 A 40B HIGGS CHARLES S JR RA 5.6 DWELLING37 84 A 38 GERMAIN KARL D RA 5.2 DWELLING38 84 A 37 RICKARD LARRY E SR TRUSTEE RA 1.2 DWELLING39 84 A 36 SNOW EUGENE F RA 1.2 DW MOBILE HOME40 84 A 34 MCDONALD GARY WAYNE RA 57.1 VACANT41 84 A 34B BROWN JAMES M & SUSAN K RA 8.2 DWELLING42 84 A 35 INLOW DOLORES RA 0.4 DWELLING43 84 1 1 WISECARVER GERALD L RA 0.9 DWELLING44 84 3 2 ROSE DALE JEFFREY & JULIA HARKRADER RA 1.2 DWELLING45 84 1 3 FINCHAM BRADLEY S RA 0.7 DWELLING46 84 1 4 KELLEY KEVIN T RA 0.6 DWELLING47 84 1 5 SEARS ARVELLA M RA 0.7 DWELLING48 84 A 33 HIBBS WANDA L RA 1.1 DWELLING49 84 A 32 MANUEL DENNIS S JR RA 1.2 DWELLING50 84 A 31 SCHUURMAN STEPHEN RA 7.8 DWELLING51 84 5 1 BROWN LILLIAN A RA 5.3 DWELLING52 84 5 4 HINTON LARRY LEE SR RA 5 DWELLING53 84 5 5 JENKINS GENE A JR RA 5.8 DWELLING54 84 A 27 CAMPBELL REX C RA 10.1 DWELLING55 84 A 27C EVANS STEPHEN E RA 46 DWELLING56 84 A 40C SHOMAKER WILLIAM L RA 9.6 DWELLING57 84 A 3 RICKARD MABEL C TRUSTEE RA 43.3 DWELLING58 84 A 4 MARQUIS MICHAEL RA 21.7 DWELLING59 84 A 34D CREIGHTON ROBERT KIM RA 7 DWELLING60 84 A 34C TIERNEY SCOTT D RA 13.6 DWELLING61 84 A 38A TAYLOR TERRY L RA 4.5 DWELLING S t r o s n i d e r L n (2 5 M P H ) KlinesMillRd(25MPH) Clark R d (25 M P H) H i t e s R d (2 5 M P H ) VaucluseRd Buff a l o Mars h Rd We s t e r n v i e w D r 29 33 28 45 46 47 27 30 31 32 21 21 34 35 36 37 25 24 38 40 39 41 42 54 55 22 43 44 48 49 50 51 23 52 53 26 1 6 57 56 5 7 58 59 61 60 50' 50' 50 ' 50' 60 ' 60' 60' 60 ' 60' 60' 10 0 ' 100 ' 100 ' 100 ' 200 ' 200 ' FLO W FL O W FLO W Legend Proposed Features Project Limits - 668.5 Acres ^_Project Entrance D D D Fence ÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍInternal Roads Laydown Yard Substation Panels Vegetative Screening Proposed 10 Foot Vegetative Screening Existing 50 Foot Mature Woodland Constraints Setbacks - 50' / 60' / 100' / 200' Existing Features ! !Transmission Line Streams Wetlands Woodlands Steep Slopes (Greater than 15%) Existing Structures 1% Annual Flood Hazard Agricultural and Forest District Frederick County Tax Parcels Topographic Contours 10 Foot 5 Foot DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE 4 OF 6 DATE 04/17/2020 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME L. WHEELER FOXGLOVE SOLAR 1 " = 350 'H: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION These exhibits and associated documents are the exclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R P R O J E C T FO X G L O V E S O L A R , L L C FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , VI R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE 0 350 700 SCALE (FEET) FOXGLOVE SOLAR, LLC 337 LOG CANOE CIRCLE STEVENSVILLE, MD 21666 (410) 604-3603 NOTES: 1. PROJECT AREA IS APPROXIMATE. 2. SETBACK LINES ARE 60 FEET FROM ADJACENT RIGHT OF WAYS, 50 FEET FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WTIH PARCELS LESS THAN 6 ACRES, 100 FEET FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITH PARCELS GREATER THAN 6 ACRES, AND 200 FEET FROM ADJACENT AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST DISTRICT PARCELS GREATER THAN 6 ACRES. 3. LANDSCAPING IS 10 FEET ALL AROUND EXCEPT WHERE 50 FEET OF MATURE WOODLAND IS EXISTING. 4. PRIMARY ZONING DISTRICT AND USE OF EACH PARCEL COMPRISING PROJECT AREA IS RA. 5. ALL PARCELS ARE LOCATED IN THE BACK CREEK MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. 6. WETLANDS ARE SOURCED FROM NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY. 7. STREAMS ARE SOURCED FROM NATIONAL HYDROGRAPHY DATASET. 8. FLOOD HAZARD DATA SOURCED FROM FEMA. 9. WOODLANDS GENERATED FROM NATIONAL LAND COVER DATASET AND AERIAL IMAGERY DIGITIZATION. 10. STEEP SLOPES GENERATED FROM VGIN LIDAR. 11. TOTAL LAND AREA OF SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 668.5 ACRES. 12. TOTAL PROPOSED LAND AREA TO BE DEVELOPED IS 370.1 ACRES. 13. PROJECT LIMITS LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN KARST BEDROCK. NO KNOWN KARST FEATURES ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA.594 B B B B B B B B B B Y:\852\840\41147 - Foxglove_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-CUP_Schematics.mxd 2 3 Legend Proposed Features Project Limits - 668.5 Acres ^_Project Entrance D D D Fence ÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍInternal Roads Laydown Yard Substation Panels Vegetative Screening Proposed 10 Foot Vegetative Screening Existing 50 Foot Mature Woodland Constraints Setbacks - 50' / 60' / 100' / 200' Existing Features Road Centerline ! !Transmission Line Streams Wetlands Woodlands Steep Slopes (Greater than 15%) 1% Annual Flood Hazard Agricultural and Forest District Frederick County Tax Parcels Topographic Contours 10 Foot 5 Foot DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE 5 OF 6 DATE 04/17/2020 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME L. WHEELER FOXGLOVE SOLAR PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN - NOTES AND DETAILS - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION These exhibits and associated documents are the exclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R P R O J E C T FO X G L O V E S O L A R , L L C FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , VI R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE NTS PARCEL OWNERS FROM SHEET 3:PARCEL OWNERS FROM SHEET 4: TRACKER SIDE PROFILE: LANDSCAPING/VEGETATIVE SCREENING DETAIL: WIDTH 4 = 8 - 10 INCHES FIXED TILT SIDE PROFILE: ˡ ˡ 10 F O O T D E P T H 3 PLANTS EVERY 10 LINEAR FEET 1/3 DECIDUOUS, 1/3 EVERGREEN, 1/3 SHRUBS AN ESTIMATED 5.7 ACRES, OR < 1%, OF THE 668.5 ACRE PROPERTY WILL BE LANDSCAPED WITH SCREENING. ˡ ˡ IDENTIFIER PIN OWNER NAME ZONE GIS ACREAGE USE1 73 A 21 WOODBINE FARMS INC RA 261.8 VACANT5 84 A 40A SNAPP ALFRED L JR RA 44.4 DWELLING6 84 A 40 SNAPP ALFRED L & SON INC RA 69.1 DWELLING7 84 A 41 REDMILES DONALD R RA 6.1 DWELLING21 84 A 50 WOODBINE FARMS INC RA 197.4 DWELLING22 84 A 29 WOODBINE FARMS INC RA 96.8 VACANT W/ MOBILE HOME23 84 A 28A BENTLEY CHARLES A RA 34.2 DWELLING24 84 A 53 LINSCOMB DAVID S RA 81 VACANT25 84 A 51 BRITNER PAUL W RA 26.5 DWELLING26 84 A 49E MCDONALD JASON A RA 5.2 DW MOBILE HOME27 84 A 49 STROSNIDER TILDEN E JR RA 162 VACANT28 84 A 49B MCDONALD ROY E RA 10.3 VACANT29 84 A 49G MCDONALD ROY E & LORETTA G RA 5.2 VACANT30 84 A 42 STROSNIDER TILDEN E JR RA 9.9 VACANT31 84 A 42D STROSNIDER TILDEN E JR RA 1.7 VACANT32 84 A 42B MANUEL DAVID M RA 1.5 DWELLING33 84 A 42A RAMEY WADE RA 6.5 DWELLING34 84 A 42C HOOVER WAYNE C RA 1.7 DWELLING35 84 A 39 GORE LEVI J RA 1.5 DWELLING36 84 A 40B HIGGS CHARLES S JR RA 5.6 DWELLING37 84 A 38 GERMAIN KARL D RA 5.2 DWELLING38 84 A 37 RICKARD LARRY E SR TRUSTEE RA 1.2 DWELLING39 84 A 36 SNOW EUGENE F RA 1.2 DW MOBILE HOME40 84 A 34 MCDONALD GARY WAYNE RA 57.1 VACANT41 84 A 34B BROWN JAMES M & SUSAN K RA 8.2 DWELLING42 84 A 35 INLOW DOLORES RA 0.4 DWELLING43 84 1 1 WISECARVER GERALD L RA 0.9 DWELLING44 84 3 2 ROSE DALE JEFFREY & JULIA HARKRADERRA 1.2 DWELLING45 84 1 3 FINCHAM BRADLEY S RA 0.7 DWELLING46 84 1 4 KELLEY KEVIN T RA 0.6 DWELLING47 84 1 5 SEARS ARVELLA M RA 0.7 DWELLING48 84 A 33 HIBBS WANDA L RA 1.1 DWELLING49 84 A 32 MANUEL DENNIS S JR RA 1.2 DWELLING50 84 A 31 SCHUURMAN STEPHEN RA 7.8 DWELLING51 84 5 1 BROWN LILLIAN A RA 5.3 DWELLING52 84 5 4 HINTON LARRY LEE SR RA 5 DWELLING53 84 5 5 JENKINS GENE A JR RA 5.8 DWELLING54 84 A 27 CAMPBELL REX C RA 10.1 DWELLING55 84 A 27C EVANS STEPHEN E RA 46 DWELLING56 84 A 40C SHOMAKER WILLIAM L RA 9.6 DWELLING57 84 A 3 RICKARD MABEL C TRUSTEE RA 43.3 DWELLING58 84 A 4 MARQUIS MICHAEL RA 21.7 DWELLING59 84 A 34D CREIGHTON ROBERT KIM RA 7 DWELLING60 84 A 34C TIERNEY SCOTT D RA 13.6 DWELLING61 84 A 38A TAYLOR TERRY L RA 4.5 DWELLING IDENTIFIER PIN OWNER NAME ZONE GIS ACREAGE USE1 73 A 21 WOODBINE FARMS INC RA 263.1 VACANT2 73 A 31 WOODBINE FARMS INC RA 84.1 VACANT3 73 A 20 BAUSERMAN CHARLES C RA 238.8 VACANT4 84 A 1 MCDONALD ALBERT A TRUST RA 207.6 VACANT W/ MOBILE HOME5 84 A 40A SNAPP ALFRED L JR RA 44.4 DWELLING6 84 A 40 SNAPP ALFRED L & SON INC RA 69.5 DWELLING7 84 A 41 REDMILES DONALD R RA 6.1 DWELLING8 84 A 44 RIDINGS L VERNON RESIDUAL TRUST RA 50.3 VACANT9 84 A 46 KAHN LLC RA 60.3 VACANT W/ MOBILE HOME10 84 8 2 22 MOUNTAIN VISTA LLC RA 2 VACANT11 84 8 2 21 MOUNTAIN VISTA LLC RA 2 VACANT12 84 8 2 20 MOUNTAIN VISTA LLC RA 2.1 VACANT13 84 8 2 19 ROBINSON JASON & JENNIFER J RA 2.9 DWELLING14 84 8 2 15 RIDGEWAY CHARLES A & LAURA S RA 2.6 DWELLING15 84 8 2 14 MOUNTAIN VISTA LLC RA 2.5 VACANT16 84 8 2 13 YOUNG BILLY M & BILLIE P RA 5.4 VACANT17 73 A 30N CAMPBELL TROY J RA 5.5 DWELLING18 73 A 30D NEWCOME PHILIP E RA 17.7 DWELLING19 73 A 30O ANDERSON SHIRLEY K RA 51.2 VACANT20 73 A 30C CARBAUGH CLAYTON S RA 2.1 DWELLING PROPOSED UTILITY PROVIDERS: POTOMAC EDISON (FIRST ENERGY) FIRST ENERGY CORP. 76 SOUTH MAIN STREET AKRON, OH 44308 1(800) 686-0011 FOXGLOVE SOLAR, LLC 337 LOG CANOE CIRCLE STEVENSVILLE, MD 21666 (410) 604-3603 NOTES: 1. PROJECT AREA IS APPROXIMATE. 2. SETBACK LINES ARE 60 FEET FROM ADJACENT RIGHT OF WAYS, 50 FEET FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WTIH PARCELS LESS THAN 6 ACRES, 100 FEET FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITH PARCELS GREATER THAN 6 ACRES, AND 200 FEET FROM ADJACENT AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST DISTRICT PARCELS GREATER THAN 6 ACRES. 3. LANDSCAPING IS 10 FEET ALL AROUND EXCEPT WHERE 50 FEET OF MATURE WOODLAND IS EXISTING. 4. PRIMARY ZONING DISTRICT AND USE OF EACH PARCEL COMPRISING PROJECT AREA IS RA. 5. ALL PARCELS ARE LOCATED IN THE BACK CREEK MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. 6. WETLANDS ARE SOURCED FROM NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY. 7. STREAMS ARE SOURCED FROM NATIONAL HYDROGRAPHY DATASET. 8. FLOOD HAZARD DATA SOURCED FROM FEMA. 9. WOODLANDS GENERATED FROM NATIONAL LAND COVER DATASET AND AERIAL IMAGERY DIGITIZATION. 10. STEEP SLOPES GENERATED FROM VGIN LIDAR. 11. TOTAL LAND AREA OF SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 668.5 ACRES. 12. TOTAL PROPOSED LAND AREA TO BE DEVELOPED IS 370.1 ACRES. 13. PROJECT LIMITS LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN KARST BEDROCK. NO KNOWN KARST FEATURES ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA.595 Y:\852\840\41147 - Foxglove_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\41147-Prime Farmland.mxd S t r o s n i d e r L n (2 5 M P H ) Kline s M i l l R d ( 2 5 M P H ) MarlboroRd(55 MPH) Clark Rd(25 M P H) H i t e s R d (2 5 M P H ) Middl e R d Abigail Way C o r a L n New e l l D r Vall e y P i k e I n e z L n Ci d e r M ill W a yOakHillDr Ge m D r NewellDr Ge r m a n y R d Va ucl u s e S p r i n g L n B u f f a l o M a r sh R d N i t t a n y S o uth W a y Vaucl u s e R d Co n e s t o g a L n Tuc k a h o e L n CarsonLn WesternviewDr Legend Project Limits - 668.5 Acres All areas are prime farmland- 27.7 Acres Farmland of statewide importance- 313.4 Acres Not prime farmland- 327.4 Acres DRAWING DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME & LOCATION SHEET NUMBERSCALE 6 OF 6 DATE 04/17/2020 DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY PROJECT NAME M.COOLEY FOXGLOVE SOLAR 1 " = 650 'H: PRIME FARMLAND MAP REVISIONS MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION These exhibits and associated documents are the exclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of PROJECT NUMBER41147 FO X G L O V E S O L A R P R O J E C T FO X G L O V E S O L A R , L L C FR E D E R I C K C O U N T Y , VI R G I N I A 10 0 1 B o u l d e r s P a r k w a y , S u i t e 3 0 0 Ri c h m o n d , V A 2 3 2 2 5 TE L 8 0 4 . 2 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ww w . t i m m o n s . c o m [ PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE 0 650 1,300 SCALE (FEET) FOXGLOVE SOLAR, LLC 337 LOG CANOE CIRCLE STEVENSVILLE, MD 21666 (410) 604-3603 NOTES: 1. PROJECT AREA IS APPROXIMATE. 2. PRIME FARMLAND DATA FROM NRCS SSURGO SOILS. 3. AERIAL IMAGERY FROM FREDERICK COUNTY (EAGLEVIEW). 596 Board of Supervisors Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: June 3, 2020 Agenda Section: County Officials Title: Ordinance Amendment to the Frederick County Code – Chapter 165 Zoning, ARTICLE II Supplementary Use Regulations; Parking; Buffers; and Regulations for Specific Uses; Part 204 Additional Regulations for Specific Uses, §165-204.19. Telecommunication facilities, commercial. Attachments: Development Review Fees .pdf 597 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: M. Tyler Klein, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment – Development Review Fees for Commercial Telecommunication Facilities CUPs DATE: May 28, 2020 During consideration of the ordinance amendment to create a two-track process for review and approval of commercial telecommunication facilities (which was subsequently approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 12, 2019), the Board discussed the fee schedule for Conditional Use Permit (CUP) applications. Fees for these types of uses were identified as a potential barrier to local service providers in applying for telecommunication facility permits. The current CUP application fee for telecommunication facilities is $7,000 (adopted by the BOS in 2011) which was intended to cover Staff review, potential third-party expert and legal review, legal advertisement and adjoining property notifications for CUP applications. In January, the Board further directed Staff to re-evaluate the fees with the intention of reducing the fee. This is a proposed amendment to Chapter 165 – Zoning Ordinance and to the Development Review Fee Schedule to reduce the fee for a Conditional Use Permit for commercial telecommunication facilities. The purpose of this reduction in fees is to encourage commercial telecommunication facilities to locate in underserved areas of the County, in particular those rural areas west of Interstate 81. The Board discussed this approach as a potential solution in lieu of any further changes to by-right tower height allowance at this time. This may be revisited in the future. The Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) discussed this item at their February 27th meeting. At that meeting, Staff proposed a new fee of $750, consistent with all “other” CUP applications (less “cottage occupations” which have a $75 fee), and as directed by the Board of Supervisors. This fee reduction would cover only those costs associated with legal advertisement and adjoining property notifications. The DRRC stated that the proposed fee, $750, was insufficient given the complexity of telecommunication applications and that the fee should reflect to the type of facility (based on height) under review. The DRRC further commented that towers greater than 50’ and less than 100’ in height would likely be “personal” towers for individual property owner for broadband service or small local service providers. The DRRC noted towers in greater than 100’ in height would be mainly for large commercial telecommunication companies (such as AT&T, Shentel or Verizon), and would require more Staff time and review than smaller towers. The DRRC proposed a revised fee schedule for CUPs for commercial 598 telecommunication facilities as follows: • Towers greater than 50’ and less than 100’ in height - $1,500 • Towers greater than 100’ in height - $7,000 (current fee) The DRRC generally supported the modified fees, outlined above; however, two (2) DRRC members expressed concern with maintaining the highest fee ($7,000) for towers greater than 100’ in height. Ultimately the consensus of the DRRC was to send the item forward to the Planning Commission for discussion. Following the DRRC meeting, the Board of Supervisors at their March 25th regular meeting adopted a temporary code amendment to reduce the fee for a CUP for commercial telecommunication facilities to $750. This temporary change will expire on May 24th. The Planning Commission discussed this item on May 6th. During their discussion, the Planning Commission sought clarification on what the application fee covers. Staff noted that the fee is intended to cover the cost of legal advertising in the local newspaper and adjoining property owner notifications, and that the staff proposed fee of $750 generally covers those cost. In response to a Planning Commissioner comment Staff noted that since the change in the ordinance to allow by- right towers up to 50’ in height and the Board of Supervisors temporary code amendment to reduce the fee to $750 only a small numbers applications have been received for new towers. Commissioner Thomas noted that the fee schedule proposed by the DRRC, $1,500 for towers greater than 50’ in height and less than 100’ in height and $7,000 for towers greater than 100’ in height did not provide enough variability for smaller towers many of which may be applied for by homeowners or local service providers and serve a much smaller area. Mr, Thomas noted that the fees for taller towers, from large broadband internet service providers such as Shentel, typically require more staff time and the fee should reflect those real costs to the County. Mr. Thomas proposed, and alternative tiered fee schedule as follows: • Towers greater than 50’ and less than 75’ in height - $750 • Towers greater than 75’ and less than 125’ in height - $2,500 • Towers greater than 125’in height - $5,000 Commissioner Oates noted that tiered fees were discussed by the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) and 100’ was determined by the Committee to be the threshold between smaller/local service provider towners (towers less than 100’ in height) and commercial towers for larger companies servicing a broader area (towers greater than 100’ in height). Mr. Oates stated in many cases, public hearings on CUP for telecommunication facilities are tabled for 60-days (or more) and subsequent advertising and notifications are necessary, further increasing the cost to the County. Mr. Thomas agreed with the increased cost of re-advertising. Commissioner Jewell expressed his concern with a substantially reduced fee, $750 as proposed by the Board of Supervisors, and the CUP process being taken advantage of by a local service provider when the intent of the tower isn’t to service just one property in need of internet service but to service a broader area around the tower. Commissioner Morrison did not agree with differentiating the fees between various tower heights, citing topography and vegetation variation in western areas of the County as challenging to establishing a consistent standard. 599 There was no additional discussion and the Planning Commission did not make any specific changes to the proposed fee schedule proposed by the DRRC and stated their comments should be provided to the Board. The Board of Supervisors discussed this item at the May 27th meeting and recommended a fee of $750 for commercial telecommunication facilities CUPs to go forward for Public Hearing. The Board stated the proposed $750 fee is intended to cover the cost to the County for advertising, posting, and notifying adjacent property owners. The Board commented that the current coronavirus crisis highlighted the need for expanded broadband internet service to underserved areas of the County for education and teleworking. Further, the Board noted that the fee only enables submitting a CUP application, and still provides the public and elected officials the opportunity to review and provide comment before towers exceeding 50—FT in height are acted upon. In summary: Proposed Development Review Fee (amount) Fee Proposed By $750 County Staff $750 BOS – Temporary Code Amendment (3/2520 – 5/24/20) $1,500 - Towers greater than 50’ and less than 100’ in height $7,000 - Towers greater than 100’ in height Development Review & Regulations Committee (DRRC) $1,500 - Towers greater than 50’ and less than 100’ in height $7,000 - Towers greater than 100’ in height Planning Commission (with comments, see summary above) $750 Board of Supervisors (with comments, see summary above) The attached documents show the existing ordinance with the proposed changes as proposed by the Board of Supervisors (with bold italic for text added). Staff is seeking a recommendation from the Planning Commission to forward to the Board of Supervisors on this proposed ordinance amendment. Attachments: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold underlined italics. 2. Revised development review fee schedule with additions shown in bold underlined italics. MTK/pd 600 Revised 05/28/2020 Page 1 of 3 ARTICLE II Supplementary Use Regulations; Parking; Buffers; and Regulations for Specific Uses Part 204 Additional Regulations for Specific Uses § 165-204.19. Telecommunication facilities, commercial. A. Standard process projects. 1. Except as provided in subsection B, no wireless facility or wireless support structure shall be sited, constructed, or operated except pursuant to a conditional use permit issued through the process defined in Part 103 of Article I of this Chapter. The issuance of a conditional use permit for the siting, construction, and operation of a wireless facility is permitted within the zoning districts specified in this Chapter, provided that, pursuant to Virginia Code § 15.2-2232(A), the general location or approximate location, character, and extent of such facilities are substantially in accord with the adopted Comprehensive Plan or part thereof and that adjoining properties, surrounding residential properties, land use patterns, scenic areas, and properties of significant historic value are not negatively impacted. [based on current intro to County Code § 165-204.19] 2. Any person seeking to install a facility or structure pursuant to this subsection shall make application to the Zoning Administrator, accompanied by payment of a fee of $750 [Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:1(B)(2) (“the fee shall not exceed the actual direct costs to process the application, including permits and inspection”)] The application shall be subject to consideration as follows and include the indicated information: a. The Board of Supervisors shall approve or disapprove the application within 150 days of receipt of the complete application by the Zoning Administrator or such shorter period as required by federal law, unless the applicant and the Board agree to a longer period for approval or disapproval of the application. Within 10 days after receipt of an application and a valid electronic mail address for the applicant, the Zoning Administrator shall notify the applicant by electronic mail whether the application is incomplete and specify any missing information; otherwise, the application shall be deemed complete. [Va. Code § 15.2- 2316.4:1(C)] b. Information to be included with application: i. A map depicting the search area used in siting the proposed facility or structure [Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:2(D); based on current 165-204.19(A)(2)]; ii. Identification of all service providers and commercial telecommunications facility infrastructure within the search area [Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:2(D); based on current 165-204.19(A)(3)]; iii. Confirmation that attempts to co-locate on existing structures have been made and, if such attempts were unsuccessful, the reasons so [Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:2(D); based on current 165-204.19(A)(3)]; iv. Documentation issued by the Federal Communications Commission indicating that the proposed facility is in compliance with the Federal Communications Commission’s established ANSI/IEEE standards for electromagnetic field levels and radio frequency radiation [based on current 165-204.19(A)(4)]; v. An affidavit signed by the landowner and by the owner of the facility or structure stating that they are aware that either or both of them may be held responsible for the 601 Revised 05/28/2020 Page 2 of 3 removal of the facility or structure as stated in subsection E [based on current 165- 204.19(A)(5)]; and vi. The applicant may voluntarily submit, and the Board may accept, conditions that address potential visual or aesthetic effects resulting from the placement of the facility or structure. [Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:2(C)] 3. If the Board of Supervisors grants a conditional use permit under this subsection, the following standards shall then apply to any property on which a wireless facility or wireless support structure is sited, in order to promote orderly development and mitigate the negative impacts to adjoining properties, residential properties, land use patterns, scenic areas, and properties of significant historic value: a. The Board may reduce the required setback distance for the wireless facility or wireless support structure as required by § 165-201.03(B)(8) of this Code if it can be demonstrated that the location is of equal or lesser impact. When a reduced setback is requested for a distance less than the height of the tower, a certified Virginia engineer shall provide verification to the Board that the wireless facility or wireless support structure is designed, and will be constructed, in a manner that if the wireless facility or wireless support structure collapsed the wireless facility or wireless support structure will be contained in an area around the wireless facility or wireless support structure with a radius equal to or lesser than the setback, measured from the center line of the base of the wireless facility or wireless support structure. In no case shall the setback distance be reduced to less than 1/2 the distance of the height of the wireless facility or wireless support structure. b. Monopole-type construction shall be required for any new wireless facility or wireless support structure. The Board may allow lattice-type construction when existing or planned residential areas will not be impacted and when the site is not adjacent to identified historic resources. c. No more than two signs shall be permitted on any wireless facility or wireless support structure. Such signs shall be limited to 1.5 square feet in area and shall be posted no higher than 10 feet above grade. d. When lighting is required for a wireless facility or wireless support structure, dual lighting shall be utilized which provides daytime white strobe lighting and nighttime red pulsating lighting unless otherwise mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration or the Federal Communications Commission. Strobe lighting shall be shielded from ground view to mitigate illumination to neighboring properties. Equipment buildings and other accessory structures operated in conjunction with the wireless facility or wireless support structure shall utilize infrared lighting and motion-detector lighting to prevent continuous illumination. e. Every wireless facility and wireless support structure shall be constructed with materials of a galvanized finish or be of a non-contrasting blue or gray unless otherwise mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration or the Federal Communications Commission. f. Every wireless facility and wireless support structure shall be adequately enclosed to prevent access by persons other than employees of the service provider. Appropriate landscaping and opaque screening shall be provided to ensure that equipment buildings and other accessory structures are not visible from adjoining properties, roads, or other rights-of-way. [the entirety of the above subsection C(3) is based on current 165-204.19(B)] 4. If the Board of Supervisors denies a conditional use permit under this subsection, the Board shall: a. Provide applicant with a written statement of the reasons for the denial [Va. Code § 15.2- 602 Revised 05/28/2020 Page 3 of 3 2316.4:1(E)(1)]; b. Identify any modifications of which the County is aware that would permit it to approve the conditional use permit [Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:1(E)(2)]; and c. Have supporting substantial record evidence in a written record publicly released within 30 days of denial [Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:1(F)(2)]. B. Maintenance of existing facilities and/or structures and replacement of existing facilities and/or structures within a 6-foot perimeter with substantially similar or same size or smaller facilities and/or structures is exempt from fees and permitting requirements under this section. [Va. Code § 15.2- 2316.4:3(A)] C. Any facility or structure permitted by this section that is not operated or used for a continuous period of 12 months shall be considered abandoned, and the owner of such facility or structure shall remove same within 90 days of receipt of notice from the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. If the facility or structure is not removed within the ninety-day period, the County may remove the facility and a lien may be placed to recover expenses. [Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4(B)(6); based on current County Code § 165-204.19(B)(7)] 603 FREDERICK COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FEES Adopted April 23, 2008 – Effective May 1, 2008, Revised 2/24/2010, 4/28/2010, 5/2011, 1/25/2012, 1/11/2017, 5/27/2020 COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN $ 3,000 non-refundable REZONING $ 1,000 – Proffer amendments not requiring a public hearing $ 5,000 base + $100/acre – 2 acres or less $ 10,000 base + $100/acre more than 2, less than 150 $ 10,000 base + $100/acre first 150 + $50/acre over 150 acres SUBDIVISION Non-Residential $1,000 base Design Plan $ 200/lot Plat $ 100/lot Residential (RP, R4, R5) Design Plan $ 2,500/base $100/lot Plat $ 200/lot to 50 lots $ 100/lot over 50 lots Rural Areas (RA) Sketch (Design) $ 2,500 base $200/acre Plat $ 200/lot Rural Areas (RA) Minor – 3 lots or less $ 200/lot Lot Consolidation $ 200/lot Boundary Line Adj. $ 200/lot VARIANCE $ 400 BZA APPEAL $ 250 ZONING CERTIFICATION LETTER $ 250 ZONING DETERMINATION LETTER $ 100 SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE EXCEPTION $ 500 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN $ 3,000 base + $100/acre for first 150 +$50/acre over 150 acres CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Cottage Occupation $ 75 Telecommunication Tower (greater thank 50-FT in height) $750 $7,000 Other $ 750 SITE PLAN Non-residential $ 2,500 base $ 200/acre to 5 acres $ 100/acre over 5 acres Residential $ 3,500 base $ 300/unit to 20 units $ 100/unit over 20 units Minor Site Plan $ 500 for revision that increases existing structure area by 20% or less & does not exceed 10,000sf of disturbed area. POSTPONEMENT of any Public Hearing or Public Meeting by Applicant after Advertisement, to include Applicant requests to TABLE an agenda item $ 500/occurrence. THIRD & SUBSEQUENT PLAN REVIEWS (including County Attorney review) for a single development application $ 500/review. BOND MANAGEMENT Establishment of bond $ 500 Reduction/Release $ 300 Replacement $ 500 TDR PROGRAM TDR Application Review $300 (*Review includes TDR Letter of Intent) TDR Certificate $200 Certificate Ownership Transfer $50 Receiving Property Approval $200 Review of Sending Property Deed Covenant $100 Review of Deed of Transfer (Extinguishment Document) $100 CHAPTER 161 FEES Installation License $300 Septic Haulers Permit $200 Residential Pump and Haul $50 Commercial Pump and Haul $500 604 Board of Supervisors Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: June 3, 2020 Agenda Section: County Officials Title: Ordinance Amendment to the Frederick County Code – Chapter 165 Zoning, ARTICLE I General Provision; Amendments; and Conditional Use Permits; Part 101 General Provisions, §165-101.08 Violations and penalties; enforcement. Attachments: Zoning Violations & Penalties.pdf 605 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: M. Tyler Klein, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment – Zoning Enforcement, Violations & Penalties DATE: May 28, 2020 The Board of Supervisors directed Staff and the Planning Commission to propose ordinance revisions to maximize the penalties for zoning violations. At present, the County enforces the zoning ordinance through the misdemeanor process, but state law also permits the use of civil penalties. If the County adopted civil penalties for specified violations, state law would require the County to pursue civil penalties for those violations, up to an accumulated fine limit of $5,000, before pursuing the misdemeanor process for those violations. The civil penalty process permits an initial fine of $200 and a $500 fine for each 10-day period thereafter for which the violation is not remedied. The misdemeanor process permits fines of $1,000, $1,500, and $2,000 for each successive 10-day period of noncompliance with an initial court directive to remedy a violation (following an initial fine of up to $1,000 for a violation), and a fine of $2,000 for every 10-day period of noncompliance thereafter. The County Code does not currently reflect these subsequent misdemeanor fines, as the General Assembly updated the enabling legislation to include them on multiple occasions since the County’s adoption of its current zoning ordinance in 1990. In theory, then, adoption of civil penalties would essentially require the County to go through 10 iterations of a $500 fine every 10 days before then proceeding to the misdemeanor process, which permits much more robust fines, culminating in the potential of a $2,000 fine every 10 days. If the objective for revisions to the zoning ordinance is to maximize fines in such a way to create a disincentive for violations, proceeding sooner to the $1,000, $1,500, and then repeated $2,000 fines for the subsequent 10-day periods a violation remains unremedied is seemingly the most effective approach. The Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) discussed this item at their February 27th meeting. The DRRC generally supported increasing the fees under the current misdemeanor process outlined in §165-101.08(A) and the item was sent forward to the Planning Commission for discussion. 606 The Planning Commission was presented this item for discussion on May 6th. Following a staff presentation, the Planning Commission generally supported pursuing the highest cost penalty that was easiest for the County to collect under the misdemeanor process and the item was sent forward to the Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors discussed this item on May 27th and recommended the item go forward for Public Hearing. The Board of Supervisors commented that the increase in penalties for zoning violations was intended to discourage repeat offenders. The attached documents show the existing ordinance with the proposed changes as proposed by the DRRC (with bold italic for text added). Staff is seeking a recommendation from the Planning Commission to forward to the Board of Supervisors on this proposed ordinance amendment. Attachments: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold underlined italics. 2. Zoning Violation Enforcement comparison chart. 3. Code of Virginia §15.2-2209, Civil penalties for violations of zoning ordinance. 4. Code of Virginia §15.2-2286, Permitted provisions in zoning ordinances; amendments; applicant to pay delinquent taxes; penalties. MTK/pd 607 CHAPTER 165 ZONING Article I General Provisions; Amendments; and Conditional Use Permits § 165-101.08 Violations and penalties; enforcement. It shall be a violation of this chapter to make any use of land in a fashion not expressly permitted by this chapter. A. Misdemeanor. Any person(s), firm or corporation, whether owner, lessee, principal, agent, employee or otherwise, who violates any provision of this chapter or who uses land or constructs or alters structures in a fashion that is not in conformance with the requirements and procedures in this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Upon conviction of such misdemeanor, such person(s), firm or corporation shall be subject to punishment by a fine of not less than $10 nor more than $1,000. If this violation is uncorrected at the time of conviction, the court shall order the violator to abate or remedy such violation in compliance with the zoning ordinance, within a time period established by the court. Failure to remove or abate a zoning violation within a specified time period shall constitute a separate misdemeanor offense punishable by a fine of not less than $10 nor more than $1,000, and any such failure during any succeeding thirty-day period shall constitute a separate misdemeanor offense for each thirty-day period, punishable by a fine of not less than $10 nor more than $1,000 ; any such failure during a succeeding 10-day period shall constitute a separate misdemeanor offense punishable by a fine of not less than $10 nor more than $1,500; and any such failure during any succeeding 10-day period shall constitute a separate misdemeanor offense for each 10 -day period punishable by a fine of not less than $10 nor more than $2,000. B. Complaints. Whenever a violation of this chapter occurs or is alleged to have occurred, any person may file a complaint to the Zoning Administrator, stating fully the case and basis of the complaint. The Zoning Administrator shall record such complaint immediately and investigate and take action as provided by this chapter. C. Notification. When the Zoning Administrator determines that a violation has occurred, a notice of the violation shall be served to the person committing or permitting the violation. The notice of the violation shall specify the nature of the violation and shall order that the violation cease within a reasonable time specified by the Zoning Administrator. D. Appeal. The interpretation of the Zoning Administrator that a violation has occurred may be appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals following proce dures set forth in this chapter. The order to cease the violation may be stayed until the 608 appeal is heard, provided that the appeal is filed on a timely basis. E. Enforcement. If the violation continues after the time period specified in the notice of violation expires, the Zoning Administrator may initiate injunction, mandamus or any other appropriate action to ensure compliance with this chapter. In addition, the Frederick County Attorney or other prosecuting attorney appointed by the Board of Supervisors shall proceed to prosecute the violation. F. Civil penalties. The Board of Supervisors may adopt an ordinance which establishes a uniform schedule of civil penalties for violations of specific provisions of this chapter according to the provisions of the Code of Virginia, as amended. Such schedule of offenses shall not include any zoning violation resulting in injury to any person or persons. In such cases, the The civil penalty shall be a fine established by the schedule. The fine shall be in lieu of criminal sanctions, and except for any violation resulting in injury to any person or persons, such designation shall preclude the prosecution of a violation as a criminal misdemeanor. G. Any person summoned for a scheduled violation subject to a civil penalty may provide a waiver of trial and admission of liability and pay the civil penalty to the County Treasurer. Such persons shall be informed of their right to stand trial and that an admission of liability will have the same effect as a judgment of the court. If a person charged with a scheduled violation does not elect to enter a waiver of trial and admission of liability, the violation shall be tried in the General District Court as provided for by law. An admission of liability or finding of liability shall not be a criminal conviction. H. The remedies provided for in this section are cumulative, not exclusive, and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by law. 609 ZO N I N G V I O L A T I O N E N F O R C E M E N T – W h a t d o e s s t a t e l a w e n a b l e ? C i v i l P e n a l t i e s M i s d e m e a n o r s I n j u n c t i v e R e l i e f No t i c e o f v i o l a t i o n re q u i r e m e n t / p e r i o d ? Ye s – 3 0 d a y s Y e s – 3 0 d a y s Y e s – 3 0 d a y s Ap p e a l o f N O V ? Y e s – t o B Z A (s e e n o t e 1 a t e n d r e B Z A ap p e a l s ) Ye s – t o B Z A (s e e n o t e 1 a t e n d r e B Z A ap p e a l s ) Ye s – t o B Z A (s e e n o t e 1 a t e n d r e B Z A ap p e a l s ) Me a n s o f i n i t i a t i n g , af t e r N O V , i f n o co m p l i a n c e Is s u a n c e o f c i v i l p e n a l t y n o t i c e ; i f no t p a i d w i t h s p e c i f i e d p e r i o d , fi l i n g o f w a r r a n t i n d e b t i n G e n e r a l Di s t r i c t C o u r t Fi l i n g o f c h a r g e s i n G e n e r a l Di s t r i c t C o u r t Fi l i n g o f s u i t i n C i r c u i t C o u r t Ma x i m u m p e n a l t y f o r fi r s t c i t a t i o n f o r t h e vi o l a t i o n $2 0 0 c i v i l f i n e $ 1 , 0 0 0 c r i m i n a l f i n e a n d o r d e r t o co m p l y Or d e r t o c o m p l y Ma x i m u m p e n a l t y f o r ad d i t i o n a l c i t a t i o n s f o r th e s a m e v i o l a t i o n $5 0 0 c i v i l f i n e ( n o t m o r e fr e q u e n t l y t h a n e v e r y 1 0 d a y s ) Fo r e a c h 1 0 d a y s n o n c o m p l i a n c e (s e e n o t e 2 a t e n d r e s t a t e c o d e am e n d m e n t s ) : 1 st t i m e - $ 1 , 0 0 0 c r i m i n a l f i n e 2 nd t i m e - $ 1 , 5 0 0 c r i m i n a l f i n e 3 rd a n d s u b s e q u e n t t i m e s - $2 , 0 0 0 c r i m i n a l f i n e Co n t e m p t o f c o u r t (t h e o r e t i c a l l y , j a i l a b l e ) Cu m u l a t i v e m a x i m u m pe n a l t i e s f o r s a m e vi o l a t i o n $5 , 0 0 0 N o l i m i t N / A Re m e d y i f v i o l a t i o n co n t i n u e s t h e r e a f t e r Ma y p r o s e c u t e a s m i s d e m e a n o r C o n t i n u e d n o n c o m p l i a n c e a t a n y po i n t c o u l d a l s o t h e o r e t i c a l l y b e j ai l a b l e c o n t e m p t o f c o u r t Se e a b o v e r e m a x i m u m p e n a l t y 610 Do e s c o u r t pr o c e e d i n g i n c l u d e or d e r t o c o m p l y ? No Y e s Y e s Co u n t y ’ s b u r d e n o f pr o v i n g t h e v i o l a t i o n i n co u r t Pr e p o n d e r a n c e o f t h e e v i d e n c e (t h a t i s , “ m o r e l i k e l y t h a n n o t t h a t th e v i o l a t i o n o c c u r r e d ” ) Pr o o f b e y o n d a r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t (t h i s i s t h e h i g h e s t a n d m o s t di f f i c u l t s t a n d a r d t o m e e t ) Pr e p o n d e r a n c e o f t h e e v i d e n c e (t h a t i s , “ m o r e l i k e l y t h a n n o t t h a t th e v i o l a t i o n o c c u r r e d ” ) Wh e n c a n t h e p r o c e s s be u s e d ? If e n a c t e d b y l o c a l i t y , t h i s p r o c e s s is e x c l u s i v e , u n l e s s v i o l a t i o n re s u l t e d i n i n j u r y t o p e r s o n ( s ) o r cu m u l a t i v e f i n e a m o u n t r e a c h e d . If c i v i l p e n a l t i e s e n a c t e d , o n l y i f vi o l a t i o n r e s u l t e d i n i n j u r y t o pe r s o n ( s ) o r t h e m a x i m u m c i v i l pe n a l t i e s r e a c h e d . Fo r a n y v i o l a t i o n , b u t t h i s p r o c e s s is m o s t u s e f u l f o r “ c o n d u c t ” vi o l a t i o n s ( e . g . , i l l e g a l bu s i n e s s e s ) . Th i s p r o c e s s i s a l s o u s e f u l w h e r e we n e e d a n o r d e r f o r t h e C o u n t y to e n t e r t h e p r o p e r t y t o r e m e d y th e v i o l a t i o n ( e . g . , e x t r e m e c l e a n up s i t u a t i o n s ) . Ex p l a n a t o r y i n f o r m a t i o n : 1 . B Z A a p p e a l s – A p r o p e r t y o w ne r c a n , t h e o r e t i c a l l y , d e l a y a l l t h r e e o f t h e e n f o r c e m e n t p r o c e ss e s b y u p t o a n a d d i t i o n a l 6 0 days by pu r s u i n g a B Z A a p p e a l ( t h e B Z A i s s u p p o s e d t o d e c i d e t h e a p p e a l i n 6 0 d a y s ) . T h e p r o p e r t y o w n e r c a n a p p e a l f u r t h e r t o t h e C i r cuit Court, but th a t f u r t h e r a p p e a l d o e s n o t s t a y en f o r c e m e n t f u r t h e r , u n l e s s t he C i r c u i t C o u r t g r a n t s a r e q u e s t b y t h e o w n e r f o r a f u r t h e r s t ay of enforcement. 2 . S u b s e q u e n t v i o l a t i o n s – m i s d e m e a n o r e n f o r c e m e n t – S i n c e t h e o r i g i n a l e n a c t m e n t o f t h e C o u n t y ’ s c u r r e n t z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e i n 1990, th e s t a t e c o d e h a s b e e n a m e n d e d on d i f f e r e n t o c c a s i o n s t o a d d p ro v i s i o n s a l l o w i n g f o r i n c r e a s i n g p r o g r e s s i v e f i n e s f o r u n r e m e d ied violations. Th e C o u n t y h a s n o t t o d a t e o p t e d t o a d d t h e s e a l l o w a n c e s t o i t s z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e . 3 . C o n s i d e r a t i o n o f c i v i l p e n a l t i e s r a i s e s a r e l a t e d i s s u e r e g ar d i n g b u i l d i n g c o d e v i o l a t i o n s . A t p r e s e n t , t h e C o u n t y u s e s t he misdemeanor pr o c e s s t o e n f o r c e a g a i n s t b u i l d i n g c o d e v i o l a t i o n s ( a l t h o u g h s ta t e l a w l i k e w i s e p e r m i t s c i v il p e n a l t i e s f o r b u i l d i n g c o d e e n f orcement). The County fr e q u e n t l y e n c o u n t e r s b u i l d i n g c od e v i o l a t i o n s c o n c u r r e n t w i t h zo n i n g v i o l a t i o n s a t t h e s a m e p r op e r t y a n d i s t y p i c a l l y a b l e t o prosecute both vi o l a t i o n s a t t h e s a m e t i m e t h r o u g h t h e m i s d e m e a n o r p r o c e s s . 4 . Z o n i n g v i o l a t i o n s g e n e r a ll y t a k e o n e o f t w o f o r m s : x “ C o n d i t i o n ” v i o l a t i o n – a p r o p e r ty i s k e p t i n a c o n d i t i o n t h a t v i o l a t e s t h e z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e , s uc h a s w h e n a p e r s o n k e e p s j u n k cars or de b r i s o n a p r o p e r t y x “ C o n d u c t ” v i o l a t i o n – a p r o p e r ty i s u s e d f o r a n o n g o i n g o r r e p ea t e d c o u r s e o f c o n d u c t t h a t v i o l a t e s t h e z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e , s u c h as use of t h e p r o p e r t y f o r a n i l l e g a l b u s i n e s s 611 Code of Virginia Title 15.2. Counties, Cities and Towns Chapter 22. Planning, Subdivision of Land and Zoning § 15.2-2209. Civil penalties for violations of zoning ordinance Notwithstanding subdivision A 5 of § 15.2-2286, any locality may adopt an ordinance which establishes a uniform schedule of civil penalties for violations of specified provisions of the zoning ordinance. The schedule of offenses shall not include any zoning violation resulting in injury to any persons, and the existence of a civil penalty shall not preclude action by the zoning administrator under subdivision A 4 of § 15.2-2286 or action by the governing body under § 15.2- 2208. This schedule of civil penalties shall be uniform for each type of specified violation, and the penalty for any one violation shall be a civil penalty of not more than $200 for the initial summons and not more than $500 for each additional summons. Each day during which the violation is found to have existed shall constitute a separate offense. However, specified violations arising from the same operative set of facts shall not be charged more frequently than once in any 10-day period, and a series of specified violations arising from the same operative set of facts shall not result in civil penalties which exceed a total of $5,000. Designation of a particular zoning ordinance violation for a civil penalty pursuant to this section shall be in lieu of criminal sanctions, and except for any violation resulting in injury to persons, such designation shall preclude the prosecution of a violation as a criminal misdemeanor, provided, however, that when such civil penalties total $5,000 or more, the violation may be prosecuted as a criminal misdemeanor. The zoning administrator or his deputy may issue a civil summons as provided by law for a scheduled violation. Any person summoned or issued a ticket for a scheduled violation may make an appearance in person or in writing by mail to the department of finance or the treasurer of the locality prior to the date fixed for trial in court. Any person so appearing may enter a waiver of trial, admit liability, and pay the civil penalty established for the offense charged. Such persons shall be informed of their right to stand trial and that a signature to an admission of liability will have the same force and effect as a judgment of court. If a person charged with a scheduled violation does not elect to enter a waiver of trial and admit liability, the violation shall be tried in the general district court in the same manner and with the same right of appeal as provided for by law. In any trial for a scheduled violation authorized by this section, it shall be the burden of the locality to show the liability of the violator by a preponderance of the evidence. If the violation remains uncorrected at the time of the admission of liability or finding of liability, the court may order the violator to abate or remedy the violation in order to comply with the zoning ordinance. Except as otherwise provided by the court for good cause shown, any such violator shall abate or remedy the violation within a period of time as determined by the court, but not later than six months of the date of admission of liability or finding of liability. Each day during which the violation continues after the court-ordered abatement period has ended shall constitute a separate offense. An admission of liability or finding of liability shall not be a criminal conviction for any purpose. No provision herein shall be construed to allow the imposition of civil penalties (i) for activities related to land development or (ii) for violation of any provision of a local zoning ordinance 1 2/27/2020 612 relating to the posting of signs on public property or public rights-of-way. 1985, c. 417, § 15.1-499.1; 1986, c. 97; 1987, cc. 78, 99; 1988, cc. 513, 813, 869, 895; 1989, c. 566; 1990, cc. 473, 495; 1992, c. 298; 1993, c. 823; 1994, c. 342;1995, c. 494;1996, c. 421;1997, c. 587; 2003, c. 192;2006, c. 248;2008, c. 727. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. 2 2/27/2020 613 Code of Virginia Title 15.2. Counties, Cities and Towns Chapter 22. Planning, Subdivision of Land and Zoning This section has more than one version with varying effective dates. Scroll down to see all versions. § 15.2-2286. (Effective until October 1, 2019) Permittedprovisions in zoning ordinances; amendments; applicant to paydelinquent taxes; penalties A. A zoning ordinance may include, among other things, reasonable regulations and provisions as to any or all of the following matters: 1. For variances or special exceptions, as defined in § 15.2-2201, to the general regulations in any district. 2. For the temporary application of the ordinance to any property coming into the territorial jurisdiction of the governing body by annexation or otherwise, subsequent to the adoption of the zoning ordinance, and pending the orderly amendment of the ordinance. 3. For the granting of special exceptions under suitable regulations and safeguards; notwithstanding any other provisions of this article, the governing body of any locality may reserve unto itself the right to issue such special exceptions. Conditions imposed in connection with residential special use permits, wherein the applicant proposes affordable housing, shall be consistent with the objective of providing affordable housing. When imposing conditions on residential projects specifying materials and methods of construction or specific design features, the approving body shall consider the impact of the conditions upon the affordability of housing. The governing body or the board of zoning appeals of the City of Norfolk may impose a condition upon any special exception relating to retail alcoholic beverage control licensees which provides that such special exception will automatically expire upon a change of ownership of the property, a change in possession, a change in the operation or management of a facility or upon the passage of a specific period of time. The governing body of the City of Richmond may impose a condition upon any special use permit issued after July 1, 2000, relating to retail alcoholic beverage licensees which provides that such special use permit shall be subject to an automatic review by the governing body upon a change in possession, a change in the owner of the business, or a transfer of majority control of the business entity. Upon review by the governing body, it may either amend or revoke the special use permit after notice and a public hearing as required by § 15.2-2206. 4. For the administration and enforcement of the ordinance including the appointment or designation of a zoning administrator who may also hold another office in the locality. The zoning administrator shall have all necessary authority on behalf of the governing body to administer and enforce the zoning ordinance. His authority shall include (i) ordering in writing the remedying of any condition found in violation of the ordinance; (ii) insuring compliance with the ordinance, bringing legal action, including injunction, abatement, or other appropriate action or proceeding subject to appeal pursuant to § 15.2-2311;and (iii) in specific cases, making findings of fact and, with concurrence of the attorney for the governing body, conclusions of law regarding determinations of rights accruing under § 15.2-2307 or subsection C of § 15.2-2311. 1 2/27/2020 614 177; 1978, c. 543; 1979, c. 182; 1982, c. 44; 1983, c. 392; 1984, c. 238; 1987, c. 8; 1988, cc. 481, 856; 1989, cc. 359, 384; 1990, cc. 672, 868; 1992, c. 380; 1993, c. 672; 1994, c. 802;1995, cc. 351, 475, 584, 603;1996, c. 451;1997, cc. 529, 543, 587;1998, c. 385;1999, c. 792;2000, cc. 764, 817; 2001, c. 240;2002, cc. 547, 703;2005, cc. 625, 677;2006, cc. 304, 514, 533, 903;2007, cc. 821, 937; 2008, cc. 297, 317, 343, 581, 593, 720, 777;2009, c. 721;2012, cc. 304, 318;2014, c. 354;2017, c. 398;2018, c. 726. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-2286. (Effective October 1, 2019) Permitted provisions inzoning ordinances; amendments; applicant to pay delinquenttaxes; penalties A. A zoning ordinance may include, among other things, reasonable regulations and provisions as to any or all of the following matters: 1. For variances or special exceptions, as defined in § 15.2-2201, to the general regulations in any district. 2. For the temporary application of the ordinance to any property coming into the territorial jurisdiction of the governing body by annexation or otherwise, subsequent to the adoption of the zoning ordinance, and pending the orderly amendment of the ordinance. 3. For the granting of special exceptions under suitable regulations and safeguards; notwithstanding any other provisions of this article, the governing body of any locality may reserve unto itself the right to issue such special exceptions. Conditions imposed in connection with residential special use permits, wherein the applicant proposes affordable housing, shall be consistent with the objective of providing affordable housing. When imposing conditions on residential projects specifying materials and methods of construction or specific design features, the approving body shall consider the impact of the conditions upon the affordability of housing. The governing body or the board of zoning appeals of the City of Norfolk may impose a condition upon any special exception relating to retail alcoholic beverage control licensees which provides that such special exception will automatically expire upon a change of ownership of the property, a change in possession, a change in the operation or management of a facility or upon the passage of a specific period of time. The governing body of the City of Richmond may impose a condition upon any special use permit issued after July 1, 2000, relating to retail alcoholic beverage licensees which provides that such special use permit shall be subject to an automatic review by the governing body upon a change in possession, a change in the owner of the business, or a transfer of majority control of the business entity. Upon review by the governing body, it may either amend or revoke the special use permit after notice and a public hearing as required by § 15.2-2206. 4. For the administration and enforcement of the ordinance including the appointment or designation of a zoning administrator who may also hold another office in the locality. The zoning administrator shall have all necessary authority on behalf of the governing body to administer and enforce the zoning ordinance. His authority shall include (i) ordering in writing the remedying of any condition found in violation of the ordinance; (ii) insuring compliance with 5 2/27/2020 615 the ordinance, bringing legal action, including injunction, abatement, or other appropriate action or proceeding subject to appeal pursuant to § 15.2-2311;and (iii) in specific cases, making findings of fact and, with concurrence of the attorney for the governing body, conclusions of law regarding determinations of rights accruing under § 15.2-2307 or subsection C of § 15.2-2311. Whenever the zoning administrator has reasonable cause to believe that any person has engaged in or is engaging in any violation of a zoning ordinance that limits occupancy in a residential dwelling unit, which is subject to a civil penalty that may be imposed in accordance with the provisions of § 15.2-2209, and the zoning administrator, after a good faith effort to obtain the data or information necessary to determine whether a violation has occurred, has been unable to obtain such information, he may request that the attorney for the locality petition the judge of the general district court for his jurisdiction for a subpoena duces tecum against any such person refusing to produce such data or information. The judge of the court, upon good cause shown, may cause the subpoena to be issued. Any person failing to comply with such subpoena shall be subject to punishment for contempt by the court issuing the subpoena. Any person so subpoenaed may apply to the judge who issued the subpoena to quash it. Notwithstanding the provisions of § 15.2-2311, a zoning ordinance may prescribe an appeal period of less than 30 days, but not less than 10 days, for a notice of violation involving temporary or seasonal commercial uses, parking of commercial trucks in residential zoning districts, maximum occupancy limitations of a residential dwelling unit, or similar short-term, recurring violations. Where provided by ordinance, the zoning administrator may be authorized to grant a modification from any provision contained in the zoning ordinance with respect to physical requirements on a lot or parcel of land, including but not limited to size, height, location or features of or related to any building, structure, or improvements, if the administrator finds in writing that: (i) the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship; (ii) such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity; and (iii) the authorization of the modification will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and the character of the zoning district will not be changed by the granting of the modification. Prior to the granting of a modification, the zoning administrator shall give, or require the applicant to give, all adjoining property owners written notice of the request for modification, and an opportunity to respond to the request within 21 days of the date of the notice. The zoning administrator shall make a decision on the application for modification and issue a written decision with a copy provided to the applicant and any adjoining landowner who responded in writing to the notice sent pursuant to this paragraph. The decision of the zoning administrator shall constitute a decision within the purview of § 15.2-2311, and may be appealed to the board of zoning appeals as provided by that section. Decisions of the board of zoning appeals may be appealed to the circuit court as provided by § 15.2-2314. The zoning administrator shall respond within 90 days of a request for a decision or determination on zoning matters within the scope of his authority unless the requester has agreed to a longer period. 5. For the imposition of penalties upon conviction of any violation of the zoning ordinance. Any such violation shall be a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000. If the violation is uncorrected at the time of the conviction, the court shall order the violator to abate or remedy the violation in compliance with the zoning ordinance, within a time period established by the court. Failure to remove or abate a zoning violation within the specified time 6 2/27/2020 616 period shall constitute a separate misdemeanor offense punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000; any such failure during a succeeding 10-day period shall constitute a separate misdemeanor offense punishable by a fine of not more than $1,500; and any such failure during any succeeding 10-day period shall constitute a separate misdemeanor offense for each 10-day period punishable by a fine of not more than $2,000. However, any conviction resulting from a violation of provisions regulating the number of unrelated persons in single-family residential dwellings shall be punishable by a fine of up to $2,000. Failure to abate the violation within the specified time period shall be punishable by a fine of up to $5,000, and any such failure during any succeeding 10-day period shall constitute a separate misdemeanor offense for each 10-day period punishable by a fine of up to $7,500. However, no such fine shall accrue against an owner or managing agent of a single-family residential dwelling unit during the pendency of any legal action commenced by such owner or managing agent of such dwelling unit against a tenant to eliminate an overcrowding condition in accordance with the Virginia Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (§ 55.1-1200 et seq.). A conviction resulting from a violation of provisions regulating the number of unrelated persons in single-family residential dwellings shall not be punishable by a jail term. 6. For the collection of fees to cover the cost of making inspections, issuing permits, advertising of notices and other expenses incident to the administration of a zoning ordinance or to the filing or processing of any appeal or amendment thereto. 7. For the amendment of the regulations or district maps from time to time, or for their repeal. Whenever the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, or good zoning practice requires, the governing body may by ordinance amend, supplement, or change the regulations, district boundaries, or classifications of property. Any such amendment may be initiated (i) by resolution of the governing body; (ii) by motion of the local planning commission; or (iii) by petition of the owner, contract purchaser with the owner's written consent, or the owner's agent therefor, of the property which is the subject of the proposed zoning map amendment, addressed to the governing body or the local planning commission, who shall forward such petition to the governing body; however, the ordinance may provide for the consideration of proposed amendments only at specified intervals of time, and may further provide that substantially the same petition will not be reconsidered within a specific period, not exceeding one year. Any such resolution or motion by such governing body or commission proposing the rezoning shall state the above public purposes therefor. In any county having adopted such zoning ordinance, all motions, resolutions or petitions for amendment to the zoning ordinance, and/or map shall be acted upon and a decision made within such reasonable time as may be necessary which shall not exceed 12 months unless the applicant requests or consents to action beyond such period or unless the applicant withdraws his motion, resolution or petition for amendment to the zoning ordinance or map, or both. In the event of and upon such withdrawal, processing of the motion, resolution or petition shall cease without further action as otherwise would be required by this subdivision. 8. For the submission and approval of a plan of development prior to the issuance of building permits to assure compliance with regulations contained in such zoning ordinance. 9. For areas and districts designated for mixed use developments or planned unit developments as defined in § 15.2-2201. 7 2/27/2020 617 10. For the administration of incentive zoning as defined in § 15.2-2201. 11. For provisions allowing the locality to enter into a voluntary agreement with a landowner that would result in the downzoning of the landowner's undeveloped or underdeveloped property in exchange for a tax credit equal to the amount of excess real estate taxes that the landowner has paid due to the higher zoning classification. The locality may establish reasonable guidelines for determining the amount of excess real estate tax collected and the method and duration for applying the tax credit. For purposes of this section, "downzoning" means a zoning action by a locality that results in a reduction in a formerly permitted land use intensity or density. 12. Provisions for requiring and considering Phase I environmental site assessments based on the anticipated use of the property proposed for the subdivision or development that meet generally accepted national standards for such assessments, such as those developed by the American Society for Testing and Materials, and Phase II environmental site assessments, that also meet accepted national standards, such as, but not limited to, those developed by the American Society for Testing and Materials, if the locality deems such to be reasonably necessary, based on findings in the Phase I assessment, and in accordance with regulations of the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the American Society for Testing and Materials. A reasonable fee may be charged for the review of such environmental assessments. Such fees shall not exceed an amount commensurate with the services rendered, taking into consideration the time, skill, and administrative expense involved in such review. 13. Provisions for requiring disclosure and remediation of contamination and other adverse environmental conditions of the property prior to approval of subdivision and development plans. 14. For the enforcement of provisions of the zoning ordinance that regulate the number of persons permitted to occupy a single-family residential dwelling unit, provided such enforcement is in compliance with applicable local, state and federal fair housing laws. 15. For the issuance of inspection warrants by a magistrate or court of competent jurisdiction. The zoning administrator or his agent may make an affidavit under oath before a magistrate or court of competent jurisdiction and, if such affidavit establishes probable cause that a zoning ordinance violation has occurred, request that the magistrate or court grant the zoning administrator or his agent an inspection warrant to enable the zoning administrator or his agent to enter the subject dwelling for the purpose of determining whether violations of the zoning ordinance exist. After issuing a warrant under this section, the magistrate or judge shall file the affidavit in the manner prescribed by § 19.2-54. After executing the warrant, the zoning administrator or his agents shall return the warrant to the clerk of the circuit court of the city or county wherein the inspection was made. The zoning administrator or his agent shall make a reasonable effort to obtain consent from the owner or tenant of the subject dwelling prior to seeking the issuance of an inspection warrant under this section. B. Prior to the initiation of an application by the owner of the subject property, the owner's agent, or any entity in which the owner holds an ownership interest greater than 50 percent, for a special exception, special use permit, variance, rezoning or other land disturbing permit, including building permits and erosion and sediment control permits, or prior to the issuance of final approval, the authorizing body may require the applicant to produce satisfactory evidence that any delinquent real estate taxes, nuisance charges, stormwater management utility fees, and any other charges that constitute a lien on the subject property, that are owed to the locality and 8 2/27/2020 618 have been properly assessed against the subject property, have been paid, unless otherwise authorized by the treasurer. Code 1950, § 15-968.5; 1962, c. 407, § 15.1-491; 1964, c. 564; 1966, c. 455; 1968, cc. 543, 595; 1973, c. 286; 1974, c. 547; 1975, cc. 99, 575, 579, 582, 641; 1976, cc. 71, 409, 470, 683; 1977, c. 177; 1978, c. 543; 1979, c. 182; 1982, c. 44; 1983, c. 392; 1984, c. 238; 1987, c. 8; 1988, cc. 481, 856; 1989, cc. 359, 384; 1990, cc. 672, 868; 1992, c. 380; 1993, c. 672; 1994, c. 802;1995, cc. 351, 475, 584, 603;1996, c. 451;1997, cc. 529, 543, 587;1998, c. 385;1999, c. 792;2000, cc. 764, 817; 2001, c. 240;2002, cc. 547, 703;2005, cc. 625, 677;2006, cc. 304, 514, 533, 903;2007, cc. 821, 937; 2008, cc. 297, 317, 343, 581, 593, 720, 777;2009, c. 721;2012, cc. 304, 318;2014, c. 354;2017, c. 398;2018, c. 726. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. 9 2/27/2020 619