HomeMy WebLinkAbout180522a
Individuals requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Office of the County Commissioners, 240.313.2200 Voice/TDD, to make
arrangements.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
May 22, 2018
Agenda
09:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CALL TO ORDER, President Terry L. Baker
APPROVAL OF MINUTES –MAY 15, 2018
09:05 A.M. CLOSED SESSION
(To discuss the appointment, employment, assignment, promotion, discipline, demotion, compensation, removal, resignation,
or performance evaluation of appointees, employees, or officials over whom this public body has jurisdiction; or any other
personnel matter that affects one or more specific individuals; to consult with staff, consultants, or other individuals about
pending or potential litigation; to consult with counsel to obtain legal advice on a legal matter; and to consider the
acquisition of real property for a public purpose and matters directly related thereto.)
RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION
10:10 A.M. COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS AND COMMENTS
10:15 A.M. REPORTS FROM COUNTY STAFF
10:20 A.M. CITIZENS PARTICIPATION
10:25 A.M. WASHINGTON GOES PURPLE – Sheriff Mullendore and Emily Keller
10:35 A.M. SENATOR AMOSS FUNDING ALLOCATION – Tom Brown, Emergency Management
Specialist, Division of Emergency Services
10:40 A.M. FY19 SENIOR CITIZEN ACTIVITIES CENTER OPERATING FUND GRANT
APPLICATION – APPROVAL TO SUBMIT APPLICATION – Stephanie Lapole,
Grant Manager
10:45 A.M. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATIVE PURCHASE – ONE (1) STREET
SWEEPER – Rick Curry, Director of Purchasing and Dave Mason, Deputy Director of
Solid Waste and Watershed Programs
10:50 A.M. BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB YOUTH OF THE YEAR: MATTHEW HERNANDEZ-
ROCKWELL – Board of County Commissioners
11:00 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING: RZ-18-001, ZONING CHANGE ON HOPEWELL BLVD –
APPLICANT: THOMAS BENNETT & HUNTER INC. – Travis Allen, Comprehensive
Planner, Department of Planning & Zoning
Terry L. Baker,
Jeffrey A. Cline, Vice
President
John F. Barr
Wayne K. Keefer
LeRoy E. Myers, Jr.
WWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
Individuals requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Office of the County Commissioners, 240.313.2200 Voice/TDD, to make
arrangements.
11:15 A.M. PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT AND MODIFICATION TO CERTAIN LANDFILL
USER FEES FOR FY2019 – Dave Mason, Deputy Director of Solid Waste and
Watershed Programs and Sara Greaves, Chief Financial Officer
11:25 A.M. PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF WATER AND SEWER RATES FOR FY2019 –
Daniel DiVito, Deputy Director of Water Quality and Sara Greaves, Chief Financial
Officer
11:35 A.M. FY2019 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET ADOPTION - Sara Greaves, Chief
Financial Officer and Kim Edlund, Director of Budget and Finance
11:55 A.M ADJOURNMENT
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Washington Goes Purple
PRESENTATION DATE: 05/22/2018
PRESENTATION BY: Sheriff Mullendore and Emily Keller
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Not Applicable
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Washington Goes Purple is a substance abuse awareness program to educate
our youth about the dangers of prescription pills. It is modeled after the highly successful program
“Talbot Goes Purple” in Talbot County (www.talbotgoespurple.org). With the heroin epidemic we are
facing, it is incredibly important to educate our youth that prescription pills are synthetic heroin.
Washington Goes Purple is a collaboration between several community partners, including the Health
Department, Local Governments, Chamber of Commerce, Rotary Clubs, Police, Fire and EMS. Our
community will “Go Purple” in September in an effort to show solidarity and spread the word. We have
a team of volunteers who will be providing educational materials at different community events,
organizations, and clubs.
We will be educating every middle and high school teacher, providing them a WGP T-Shirt and
educational brochures. Throughout the first several weeks of school, we will be talking to the students
and also providing educational materials. More information can be found at
www.washingtongoespurple.com .
All donations are tax-deductible and are being handled by the Community Foundation of Washington
County.
DISCUSSION:
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Washington Goes Purple Brochure and 1-Pager
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Have the "new conversation"-
Talk to your kids about the
dangers of misusing prescription
painkillers
www.washingtongoespurple.com
MESSAGES FROM LAW
ENFORCEMENT :
In my 29 years of law enforcement, I
have worked tirelessly to combat illegal
narcotics and addiction in the communities
I have served. Nothing can compare to the
devastation that the opioid epidemic has
bought to Hagerstown's door steps.
Opioid addiction does not discriminate by
any demographic in our society and has in
fact touched all of us in some fashion. Law
enforcement alone cannot arrest our way
out of this horrible crisis.
It will take education, perseverance,
selflessness and the dedication from all
community stakeholders to combat this
epidemic and the terrible effect has on our
community. I believe that as long as we are
united, we can and will make an impact."
- Chief Victor Brito, Hagerstown Police
Department
Washington County Health Department –
Local Addictions Authority
Phone: 240-313-3310
Washington County Mental Health
Authority
Phone: 301-739-2490
Washington Goes Purple is an ambitious
and important project, and your support is
greatly appreciated. All contributions are
tax-deductible, made through our partner
the Community Foundation of Washington
County. When you click the link to donate,
choose the "Washington Goes Purple" drop
down. If you’d like to offer in-kind support,
please contact us.
HOW CAN I HELP ?
THE GOOD SAMARITAN LAW
Never leave anyone who needs help.
Whether there's an overdose on alcohol or
drugs, dial 911 and then WAIT FOR HELP.
The Good Samaritan Law protects people
who help from certain crimes. It does NOT
protect people who leave!
NARCAN TRAINING
If you know someone using or abusing
heroin, call 240-313-3310 for free Narcan
training.
Prevent Addiction.
Washington Goes Purple is a substance
abuse awareness program that will engage
our community and youth to stand against
substance abuse.
Painkillers are synthetic heroin. It's time to
have "the new conversation" with our kids
about prescription pain killers.
More information on Washington Goes
Purple is available at
www.washingtongoespurple.com and
facebook.com/washingtongoespurple
91 PEOPLE DIE EVERY DAY
FROM HEROIN OR
PRESCRIPTION PAINKILLER
OVERDOSE .
MESSAGES FROM LAW
ENFORCEMENT :
TEEN RX DRUG ABUSE FACTS
6 percent of 12th graders report using
narcotic drugs, among the most
dangerous of prescription medications
14 percent of 12th graders report using
one or more of these prescription drugs
—narcotics, sedatives, tranquilizers,
and/or amphetamines
3 percent of 10th graders report using the
narcotic pain reliever OxyContin
18 percent of high school students report
taking a prescription drug without a
prescription
Most teens report getting prescription
medications from friends or relatives
Teens today perceive fewer risks
associated with misusing or abusing
prescription stimulants than did their
peers in 2009
Most opioid addictions begin with the
use and abuse of prescription opioids.
Oxycontin, Oxycodone, Hydrocodone,
Morphine, Percocet and Vicodin are all
synthetic opioids and should be monitored
closely when prescribed and used only for a
very short time.
There is no set time for how long it takes for
the body to transition from drug
dependence to opiate addiction, but the
longer and more you use opiates, the faster
addiction will occur.
Please be responsible and consult with your
physician when using these prescriptions.
Overdose deaths in Washington County far
exceed the number of deaths by motor
vehicle crashes and homicides combined."
-Sheriff Mullendore, Washington County
Sheriff's Department.
Source: Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Miech, R.A.,Bachman, J. G.,
& Schulenberg, J. E. (2015). Monitoring the Future national results
on adolescent drug use: Overview of key findings, 2014. Ann
Arbor, Mich.: Institute for Social Research, the University of
Michigan
A SUBSTANCE ABUSE AWARENESS
PROGRAM THAT WILL ENGAGE OUR
COMMUNITY AND YOUTH TO STAND
AGAINST SUBSTANCE ABUSE.
Washington Goes Purple is an ambitious and important
project, and your support is greatly appreciated. All
contributions are tax-deductible, made through our partner
the Community Foundation of Washington County.
Painkillers are synthetic heroin. It's time to have the "new
conversation" with our kids about prescription pain killers.
Washington Goes Purple will spread awareness about the
dangers of prescription pill misuse, The Good Samaritan Law,
and the importance of properly disposing of your
prescriptions
Join our community partners and get involved today!
www.washingtongoespurple.com www.facebook.com/washingtongoespurple
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Senator Amoss Funding Allocation
PRESENTATION DATE: May 22, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Tom Brown, Emergency Management Specialist
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to accept the recommendations of the Director of Emergency
Services, authorizing the Department of Budget and Finance to reimburse volunteer fire and EMS
companies for qualified expenses under the FY 2018 Senator William H. Amoss Fire, Rescue, and
Ambulance Fund subsidy, as outlined in the attached document. All submissions for reimbursement
under this program shall be reviewed and authorized by the Director of Emergency Services. The
total FY 2018 funding received by the County is $339,691.00
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The State of Maryland distributes an annual payment to each County for
support of local fire and rescue operations. The County in turn makes notification of the funding to
the eligible volunteer fire and rescue corporations. Financial accountability and reporting is handled
within the Division of Emergency Services and the County files a financial report with the State on an
annual basis.
DISCUSSION: The Senator William H. Amoss Fire, Rescue, and Ambulance Fund is authorized
within the Public Safety Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland. The Maryland Emergency
Management Agency is responsible for the program.
FISCAL IMPACT: Loss of funding would result in the reduction of equipment funding and an
increase in unreimbursed expenditures for the independent fire and EMS companies.
CONCURRENCES: Dale Hill, President, WCVFRA
Kim Edlund, Director, Budget and Finance
Robert J. Slocum, County Administrator
ALTERNATIVES: None
ATTACHMENTS: Fiscal Year 2018 Distribution Matrix
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Washington County, Maryland
Allocation of 508 State Grant Funds
Fiscal Year 2018
Fire Total Distributions Amount
Hagerstown Fire Department 1468 6 78,390.40
First Hose Comanay of Boonsboro 920 1 13,065.03
Clear Spring Volunteer Fire Company 396 1 13,065.03
Williamsport Volunteer Fire and EMS 2651 1 13,065.03
Community Volunteer Fire Company 699 1 13,065.03
Funkstown Volunteer Fire Company 1377 1 13,065.03
Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway 1498 1 13,065.03
Leitersburg Volunteer Fire Company 1688 1 13,065.03
Maugansville Goodwill Volunteer Fire Company 1813 1 13,065.03
Smithsburg Community Volunteer Fire Company 2310 1 13,065.03
Sharpsburg Volunteer Fire Company 2224 1 13,065.03
Potomac ValleyVolunteer Fire Company 2068 1 13,065.03
Hancock Volunteer Fire Company 1510 1 13,065.03
Longmeadow Volunteer Fire Company 1698 1 13,065.03
Mt. Aetna Volunteer Fire Company 1908 1 13,065.03
Total Distribution - Fire 20 261,300.82
EMS
Sharpsburg Area Emergency Medical Service 6013 1 13,065.03
Hancock Rescue Squad 1502 1 13,065.03
Boonsboro Area Emergency Medical Service 281 1 13,065.03
Clear Spring Volunteer Ambulance Club 393 1 13,065.03
Smithsburg Area Emergency Medical Service 2309 1 13,065.03
Community Rescue Service, Inc.1035 1 13,065.03
Total Distribution - EMS 6 78,390.18
Grand Total 26 339,691.00
undistributed
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: FY19 Senior Citizen Activities Center Operating Fund Grant Application –
Approval to Submit Application
PRESENTATION DATE: May 22, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Stephanie Lapole, Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management and
Amy Olack, Executive Director, Washington County Commission on Aging
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the submission of the application for the
Senior Citizens Activities Center Operating Fund Grant to the Maryland Department of Aging in
the amount of $40,449 and accept awarded funding.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Washington County Office of Grant Management is seeking
approval on behalf of the Washington County Commission on Aging to request funding in the
amount of $11,289 which will be utilized to offset the cost of salary and benefits for the
Assistant Director of the Senior Activities Center.
In addition, the Washington County Commission on Aging is seeking $29,160 of competitive
grant funds in order create a new innovative Senior Activities Center program called Cycling for
Seniors which will focus on increasing exercise and addressing chronic disease prevention and/or
management. The Cycling for Seniors program would create a new dedicated cycling room at the
Center.
DISCUSSION: The Maryland Department of Aging requires applications to only be submitted
by local governments; therefore, the County will be the grant applicant and will then enter into a
sub-recipient agreement with the Washington County Commission on Aging to implement the
grand funded project. Any grant awarded funds will be received and disbursed through the
County’s Budget and Finance office and the Office of Grant Management will ensure all
required fiscal and programmatic reports are submitted in an accurate and timely manner. The
grant performance period is from July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019 and matching funds are not
required.
FISCAL IMPACT: Recurring expenses will be the sole responsibility of the Washington
County Commission on Aging.
CONCURRENCES: Director, Office of Grant Management
ALTERNATIVES: Deny approval for submission of this request
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchase – Purchase of One (1) Street Sweeper
PRESENTATION DATE: May 22, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Rick Curry, CPPO – Director of Purchasing and David A. Mason, P.E.,
Deputy Director of Solid Waste and Watershed Programs
RECOMMENDED MOTION: To authorize by Resolution, the Washington County Highway
Department to purchase one (1) Street Sweeper, at a cost of $308,784.00 from Schwarze Industries,
Inc. of Huntsville, AL and to utilize another jurisdiction’s contract (RFP #122017) that was awarded
by the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA).
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Street sweeping is an initiative that is part of an effort to reduce the trash and
debris that makes its way into the county's waterways and to meet a federally mandated water quality
improvement goal to aid with compliance goals of the new National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES/MS4) Permit requirements established by MDE. The street sweeper will be
maintaining the urbanized area as defined by the census, which is estimated to be about 236 center line
of road miles. Street sweeping not only improve water quality, it helps reduce pollution. The unit will
not only remove debris from the shoulder of roadway, but also help improve ride-ability and increase
safety. This Purchase is in support of the Clean County Initiative Program. The intent of the Street
Sweeper Program is to operate a minimum of nine (9) months of the year.
The Code of the Public Laws of Washington County, Maryland (the Code) §1-106.3 provides that the
Board of County Commissioners may procure goods and services through a contract entered into by
another governmental entity, in accordance with the terms of the contract, regardless of whether the
County was a party to the original contract. If the Board of County Commissioners determines that
participation by Washington County would result in cost benefits or administrative efficiencies, it could
approve the purchase of this vehicle in accordance with the Code referenced above by resolving that
participation would result in cost benefits or in administrative efficiencies. The County will benefit
with direct cost savings in the purchase of this vehicle because of the economies of scale this large
buying group (NJPA) has leveraged.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) account DNG039.
CONCURRENCES: Chief Financial Officer (Fiscal Impact Only), County Administrator, Director
of Engineering, Director of Public Works.
ALTERNATIVES: Do not award the purchase of the vehicle.
ATTACHMENTS: Schwarze Industries, Inc. price quote dated March 28, 2018.
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
3/28/18 NATIONAL JOINT POWERS ALLIANCE QUOTE FOR A SCHWARZE A8 TWISTER SWEEPER
NJPA CONTRACT NO 122017-SWZ
Customer: WASHINGTON COUNTY Delivery: MARYLAND
Description Amount
Schwarze Model A8 TWISTER Street Sweeper with all standard equipment, 140 HP TIER IVF AUX ENGINE
Freightliner Model M2 chas6sis, 33,000 GWVR, a/c, dual steer, 300 HP, Allison 3500 automatic transmission (special order)
Body mounting on chassis
Sweep head deluge
Dual gutter brooms shall be provided
Dual power tilt shall be provided
Dual Gutter broom extension override
Standby full with throttle ramp
Variable speed gutter brooms
Additional Sweeper manual
Remote grease fittings for fan
Single camera system
Water tank with additional 350 gallons, 600 gallon total
Water tank sight gauge side of tank
Water tank low level alarm and indicator
Front mounted spray bar
Hopper spray bar with 4 nozzles
Page 1 of 2
Description Amount
Stainless steel hopper
Hopper hand hose power boom HD with remote engine throttle
Pendant control for power boom
Hand hose 4' extension
Hopper deluge conical spray
Hopper vibrator
Hopper screen vibrator
Low hydraulic level indicator in cab
Engine remote throttle
Strobe, hopper three corner, LED
LED floodlight
Arrow board, Traffic Guide
Barlight, cab with guard, LED
12" parabolic mirrors
Warranty package, 1 year or1200 hours
Back up alarm
Local dealer pre delivery inspection
Training at customer facility
Delivery to customer facility
TOTAL CONTRACT PRICE OFFERED TO NJPA MEMBER $308,784.00
Pricing discounted pursuant to contract with National Joint Powers Alliance Contract.
Vendor/Contract Holder Schwarze Industries Inc. 1055 Jordan Road, Huntsville, AL 35811
PURCHASE ORDER TO BE MADE TO: Schwarze Industries, Inc. Contact: M.J. DuBois Email: njpa@schwarze.com Phone:410-924-1004
Page 2 of 2
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: The Boys and Girls Club’s Youth of the Year – Maryland recipient: Matthew Hernandez-
Rockwell
PRESENTATION DATE: May 22, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Board of County Commissioners
RECOMMENDED MOTION: N/A
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Matthew Hernandez-Rockwell, 18, is a graduating junior at Clear Spring High
School. In 2004, Matthew’s dad had been deported; shortly thereafter, Matthew and his 8 siblings were
placed into the foster care program. He was eventually adopted and moved to Washington County.
Matthew was not able to read until he was almost 10 or 11, but he never let that stop him. He remembers
joining the Boys and Girls Club at an early age and that is where his journey began.
DISCUSSION: For nearly 70 years, the Youth of the Year program has honored and celebrated the
nation’s most inspiring teens and their incredible journeys. Stories of outstanding leadership, service,
academic excellence and dedication to living a healthy lifestyle have made Youth of the Year America’s
premier leadership and recognition program for teens.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING for RZ-18-001, a zoning change from Highway Interchange (HI)
to Industrial General (IG) on a 19.37-acre parcel located on the east side of Hopewell Road, north of
Halfway Boulevard for applicant Thomas Bennett & Hunter, Inc.
PRESENTATION DATE: May 22, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Travis Allen, Comprehensive Planner, Department of Planning and Zoning
RECOMMENDED MOTION: No motion at this time. A public hearing is required as part of the
zoning change process to take public comment.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Thomas Bennett & Hunter, Inc., the contract purchaser, has submitted an
application requesting rezoning of the 19.37-acre parcel located on Hopewell Road from Highway
Interchange to Industrial General. The parcel is owned by the Hagerstown-Washington County
Industrial Foundation. The parcel is located in the Urban Growth Area and received an Industrial Flex
designation on the County Comprehensive Plan Land Use map. It is currently vacant.
DISCUSSION: The applicant claims that a mistake was made when the Highway Interchange
designation was assigned during the comprehensive rezoning of the Urban Growth Area approved in
2012. The application states that the mistake occurred when “…the existing predominantly industrial
nature of Hopewell Valley … and the reasonably foreseeable future trend of industrial use
intensification were not sufficiently taken into consideration when the HI zoning district was
assigned…”. The applicant claims further that if these factors had been sufficiently considered an
industrial district would have been assigned. The attachments elaborate the applicant’s request and
justification and also provide a staff analysis of criteria required by the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning
Commission held a public information and comment meeting on March 5, 2018. The Planning
Commission formulated and approved a recommendation in favor of the application, accepting the
applicants evidence of a mistake, during its April 2, 2018 meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable
CONCURRENCES: Planning Commission
ALTERNATIVES: Maryland law requires a public hearing as part of the rezoning process. There is
no alternative.
ATTACHMENTS: Application for RZ-18-010, Staff Report and Analysis, Planning Commission
minutes of March 5 and April 2, 2018 meetings, Planning Commission recommendation
public comment (1).
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS:
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Washington County
7
FOR PLANNING COMMISSION USE ONLY
Rezoning No.
pate Filed• (-
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
ZONING ORDINANCE MAP AMENDMENT APPLICATION
-0601115 Aanneff <i
Applicant
Address
khrIle
Primary Contact
❑Properly Owner `,Contract Purchaser
nAttorney ❑Consultant
❑0ther:
Phone Number
Address rfrtr��.r t t,f, jsL�: ;';P42-_ E-mail Address
Property Location: I W.0 I( r
Tax Map: (:0 ` f Grid: C:C> I ( Parcel No.: 092 2 Acreage: rj j 37
Current Zoning: _ _ l Requested Zoning:
Reason for the Request: ❑ Change in the character of the neighborhood
�� Mistake in original zoning
PLEASENOTE: A Justification Statemeuired`for either.reason
Applicant's Signature 7 8d 14
Subscribed and sworn before me this 9th day of Janua 20 18
My commission expires on 4/27/18
o r Pu is
FOR PLANNING COMMISSION USE ONLY _y1
❑ Application Form ❑ Names and Addresses of all Adjoining
❑ Fee Worksheet & Confronting Property Owners
❑ Application Fee ❑ Vicinity Map
❑ Ownership Verification ❑ Justification Statement
❑ Boundary Plat (including Metes ❑ 30 copies of complete Application
& Bounds) Package
a RECEIVED
JAN 12 2018
WASHINGTON COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT r. j%t, i a +
FOR PLANNING COMMISSION USE ONLY
Rezoning No.
Date Filed:
(� Washington Counter
WASI IINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
PLANNING & ZONING FEE WORKSHEET
FOR PLANNING COMMISSION USE ONLY
Rezoning No.
Date Filed:
PLEASE COMPLETE ONLY THE
SECTION THAT APPLIES.
Applicant's Name: 7 %100105 f' t1i'lf''f �i�ul'1�t.1� �i IC Date: 3 r
Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment ................................ $ 2,000.00
Number of Acres *? x $20.00 per acre ................
Engineering Review Fee .................................... $ 150.00
Technology Fee ........................................... 15.00
TOTAL FEES DUE — MAP AMENDMENT ..... $ LP C'
_N0
Text Amendment ............................................... $ 2,000.00
Choose One: ❑ Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
❑ Forest Conservation Ordinance
❑ Solid Waste Plan
❑ Subdivision Ordinance
❑ Water and Sewer Plan
❑ Zoning Ordinance
❑ Other:
Technology Fee .......................................... 15.00
TOTAL FEES DUE —TEXT AMENDMENT ..... $ 2,015.00
Forest`Conservation Exemption .................................... $ 25.00
Technology Fee ................................................ 15.00
TOTAL FEES DUE = FOREST EXEMPTION.... $ 40.00
Please make checks payable to "Washington County. Treasurer".
Llu
P
FOR PLANNING COMMISSION USE ONLY
Rezoning No.
Date Filed:
DIVELBISSBc.WILKINSON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
January 12, 2018
Department of Planning & Zoning
Attn: Stephen Goodrich, Director
Washington County Admin. Complex
100 W. Washington Street, Suite 2600
Hagerstown, MD 21740
Re: Piecemeal Rezoning of Real Property Located at 11661 Hopewell Road
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
Thomas Bennett & Hunter, Inc., a Maryland corporation ("TBH") is the contract
purchaser of that certain parcel of real property located at 11661 Hopewell Road,
Hagerstown, Maryland (Map 48, Parcel 572; Tax Acct. No. 24-000400) containing +/-
19.37 acres which is shown and depicted on the "Rezoning Exhibit" prepared by
Frederick Seibert & Associates, Inc., dated January 9, 2018 and attached hereto as
Exhibit #1. (the "Property"). A metes and bounds description of the Property is also
attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit #2.
The Property is currently owned by the Hagerstown Washington County Industrial
Foundation, Inc., a Maryland corporation ("CHIEF") who has consented to the filing of
the within Piecemeal Rezoning request by TBH. See the Owner's Representative
Affidavit attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit #3.
Attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit #4 is a vicinity map showing the
current HI (Highway Interchange) zoning classification for the Property as well as the
zoning classifications for the adjacent and surrounding properties.
TBH hereby requests a change in the zoning classification for the Property from HI
(Highway Interchange) to IG (Industrial, General)'.
t TBH is amenable to a change from the current HI (Highway Interchange) zoning classification
to IR (Industrial, Restricted) if deemed more appropriate for the Property by the Washington
County Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners.
13424 Pennsylvania Ave PHONE (301) 791-9222��
Suite 302 FAX (301) 791-9266
Hagerstown, MD 21742 WEB www.divelbisslaw.com
Hopewell Value
The Property is located within the "Hopewell Valley" targeted economic development
area which is essentially the entire area bounded on the north by Md. Rte. 40; on the
south by I-70; on the west by Md. Rte. 63; and on the east by I 81, excluding only the
Lakeside Mobile Home Park. See Map 23 from the Comprehensive Plan attached hereto
and incorporated herein as Exhibit #5 identifying the Hopewell Valley Targeted
Economic Development Area.
Hopewell Valley is described in the Washington County Comprehensive Plan (2002) as
follows:
"moderate -heavy industrial area that has seen significant development in the
later part of the 1990s. Development is primarily low -tech in nature with
emphasis on manufacturing, warehouse/ distribution centers and freight
transportation support facilities." (p. 68) (emphasis added).
In addition to being identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a Targeted Economic
Development Area, Hopewell Valley is located within a designated "Enterprise Zone"
which is intended to "help promote growth of the industrial and commercial [tax] base"
in Washington County. (See http:l/hagerstownedc.org/incentives/tax-
credits/ enterprise -zones).
There can be no dispute that the predominant land -uses in Hopewell Valley are as
described in the Comprehensive Plan and as targeted by the Enterprise Zone tax
incentive program; that is, moderate -heavy industrial with an emphasis on
manufacturing, warehouse/ distribution centers and freight transportation facilities.
Below is a list of the representative land -uses in Hopewell Valley:
User
Land -use
Tractor Supply
Warehouse/Distribution
Pavestone
Manufacturin
Wantz Distributers
Warehouse/Distribution
Bowman
Warehouse
Warehouse/Distribution
Performance Pie
Manufacturing
Liberty Property
Warehouse/Distribution
FedEx Ground
Freight Transport.
Staples
Warehouse/Distribution
Home Depot
Warehouse/Distribution
Lennox
Warehouse/ Distribution
2
Current Zoning
Although the predominant land -uses in Hopewell Valley are remarkably consistent, the
region has two (2) different predominant zoning classifications; the majority of the
southern and western portions of Hopewell Valley are zoned HI (Highway
Interchange) while the northeastern section is primarily zoned IG (Industrial General).
See the Washington County Zoning Map attached hereto and incorporated herein as
Exhibit #6.
The explanation for how two (2) different zoning districts can permit substantially
similar land -uses can be found in the structure of the HI zoning district and the
similarity between the IG zoning district and the IR (Industrial Restrict) zoning district.
The HI zoning district does not contain a separate and independent list of Principal
Permitted Uses. Instead, the HI permits all the Principal Permitted uses allowed in the
BL, BG, PB and ORT Districts and, most importantly in this instance, all the Principal
Permitted Uses in the IR District with the exception of heliports and Commercial
Communications Towers. Thus, the predominantly industrial uses permitted in the
southern and western portions of Hopewell Valley are permitted due to the HI zoning
district's incorporation by reference of the land -uses permitted in the IR zoning district.
With regard to the IG zoning district it permits a majority of the same industrial and
manufacturing uses permitted in the IR, with the addition of several heavier, more
intense industrial uses. However, the land -uses in Hopewell Valley are more moderate
and thus are permitted in both the IR and IG zoning districts.
Therefore, because of the shared commonality of permitted uses in the IR zoning
district, there is significant overlap between the IG and HI zoning districts and it is
difficult to discern on the ground where the different zoning districts begin and end.
The chart below illustrates how the land -uses currently in Hopewell Valley are
permitted in their respective zoning districts of IG and HI, demonstrating clearly that
the IR zoning district is the critical path.
IG Zoned Properties
Tractor Supply
Pavestone
Wantz Distributers
Bowman Warehouse
Performance Pipe
Liberty Property Trust
HI Zoned Properties
FedEx Ground
Staples
Home Depot
Lennox
Rezoning Request
Zoning Districts Included In HI
Zoning
IG IR ORT PB BG BL
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
There are two (2) elements to a piecemeal rezoning request such as this one: (i) there
has been either a substantial change in the character of the neighborhood in which the
Property is located or there was a mistake in the original zoning of the Property; and (ii)
the requested zoning classification is appropriate for the Property.
0
'Mistake' in the Original Zoning
In this case, TBH contends that the HI (Highway Interchange) zoning assigned to the
Property during the last Comprehensive Rezoning in 2012 was a mistake.
As per Maryland case law, to sufficiently demonstrate "mistake" the petitioning party
must show that existing facts, or reasonably foreseeable future projects or trends, were
not taken into consideration at the time of the zoning. See generally, Boyce v. Sembly,
334 A.2d 137,142-43 (Md.App.1975); and White v. Spring,109 Md.App. 692, 675 A.2d
1023 (1996).
When the Property was last Comprehensively Rezoned in 2012, (i) the existing,
predominantly industrial nature of Hopewell Valley; and (ii) the reasonably foreseeable
future trend of industrial use intensification, were not sufficiently taken into
consideration when the HI zoning district was assigned to the Property.
These mistaken assumptions with regard to the future development of Hopewell Valley
in general and the Property in particular, are sufficient grounds to find that a "mistake
in the original zoning" justifies the piecemeal rezoning of the Property.
IG (IR) Zoning is Appropriate for the Property
The natural and logical use for the Property was, when it was comprehensively zoned
in 2012, and remains today an industrial use. The Property is directly adjacent to an
active rail line, is +/- 0.20 mi. from Interstate 81 (+/- 0.50 mi. driving distance), and
there is only one (1) property separating it from the existing IG zoned portion of
Hopewell Valley. In fact, the northwestern corner of the Property actually touches the
IG zoned property. In addition, on the single property zoned HI which separates the
Property from the existing IG area is an industrial land -use (Purina Mills).
Therefore, the more appropriate zoning classification for the Property is IG (Industrial,
General): However, if deemed more appropriate for the Property by the Washington
County Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners, TBH is
amenable to a change from the current HI (Highway Interchange) zoning classification
to IR (Industrial, Restricted).
The purpose of the IG (Industrial, General) zoning district, as set forth in the Zoning
Ordinance, "is to provide locations for manufacturing, processing, and other heavy
industrial uses which may require extensive transportation, water and/or sewerage
facilities, or open space, because of the number of employees, the type of manufacturing
operation, or any by-products which might result from the use." (Article 14, p. 124)
5
The purpose of the IR (Industrial, Restricted) zoning district "is to provide locations for
low intensity manufacturing and assembly processes which may not require extensive
measures to allow compatibility with adjacent land uses." (Article 13, p. 118)
CONCLUSION
In sum, TBH, with the consent and endorsement of the property owner (CHIEF),
respectfully submit that a piecemeal rezoning of the Property is justified due to a
mistake in the original zoning; and that a classification change for the Property from HI
(Highway Interchange) to IG (Industrial General) is appropriate considering the
character and condition of the Property and surrounding areas, and is consistent with
the County's Comprehensive Plan. However, if the IR (Industrial, Restricted) zoning
district is deemed more appropriate for the Property by the Washington County
Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners, TBH would also find
this classification acceptable.
Very truly yours,
l�ivelbiss & Wilkinson
Jas n M. Divelbiss
Att riv at Lazo
no
�• .
R
§
Exhibit #]
Ar,LN
FREDERICK,5o E�TsOCIATES. INC. CIVIL ENGINEERING I SURVEYING I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
June 16, 2016
Description to combine Tax Map Parcels 572 and 865.
Situate along the south side of Hopewell Road approximately 700 feet eastward from its
intersection with Halfway Boulevard in Election District No. 24, Washington County, Maryland
and being more particularly described in accordance with a survey by Frederick, Seibert and
Associates, Inc. as follows:
Beginning at a rebar and cap set on the southern right of way line of Hopewell Road, said rebar
being at the northwestern most corner of the lands conveyed by John W. Brown and Mildred L.
Brown, his wife to Hagerstown -Washington County Industrial Foundation by deed dated
February 3, 1999 and recorded in Liber 1474, folio 173 among the Land Records of Washington
County, Maryland, thence running with said right of way line N65°18'24"E 703.25 feet to a
point, thence with a curve to the left having a radius of 1,175.92 feet, an are length of 164.63 feet
and a chord bearing and distance ofN61°17'45"E 164.50 feet to a rebar found, thence leaving
Hopewell Road and running along lands now or formerly of Purina Mills, Inc. (Liber 1247, folio
413) S 12°18'39"E 1,048.74 feet to a rebar and cap set on the northern right of way line of CSX
Railroad, thence with said right of way S55°52'54"W 597.46 feet to a rebar and cap set on the
eastern right of way line of Halfway Boulevard, thence with said right of way with a curve to the
right having a radius of 5,619.58 feet, an are length of 461.60 feet and a chord bearing and
distance ofN60°35'36"W 461.47 feet to a rebar and cap set, thence leaving Halfway Boulevard
and running along lands now or formerly of 2004 Halfway Boulevard, LLC (Liber 4441, page
39) N24°24'54"E 320.92 feet to a rebar and cap set, thence N27°25'04"W 527.38 feet to the place
of beginning;
Containing 19.37 acres of land more or less;
Said lands being further shown and defined as "New Lot Area 19.37 Ac." on the
Preliminary/Final Development Plat for GTI recorded at Plat Folio 10632 among the Land
Records of Washington County, Maryland. Said lands are conveyed subject to the conditions and
restrictions shown thereon as well as to any and all other easements,or rights of way of record
and applicable thereto.
Said lands being a portion of the lands conveyed by Mildred M. Powell to Hagerstown
Washington County Industrial Foundation, Inc. by deed dated December 21, 1995 and recorded
in Liber 1246, folio 805 together with a portion of the lands conveyed by Bowman Group, LLP
to Hagerstown Washington County Industrial Foundation, Inc. by deed dated January 23, 1998
and recorded in Liber 13 85, folio 149 together with all of the lands conveyed by John W. Brown
and Mildred L. Brown, his wife to Hagerstown -Washington County Industrial Foundation, Inc.
by deed dated February 3, 1999 and recorded in Liber 1474, folio 173 all being recorded among
the Land Records of Washington County, Maryland.
Exhibit #2
fsa- d.Com HAGERSTOWN, MD GREENCASTLE, PA CARLISLE, PA
128 S Potomac Street 29 W. Baltimore Street 101 N. Hanover Street
Hagerstown, MD 21740 Greencastle, PA 17225 Carlisle, Pa 17013
301. 791, 3650 717, 597.1007 71 T 701, 8111
\ ,COfy Q
CO L
f a
—� Washington County
Department of Planning & Zoning
�. I?YL�Owner's Representative Affidavit
This is to certify that Thomas Bennett & Hunter, Inc. (` 13H") is the contract purchaser of that
certain parcel of real property located at 11661 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland (the
"Property"), and that TBH and/or its Attorney representative, Jason M. Divelbiss, shall be
authorized to make application for the piecemeal rezoning of the Property from its current
zoning classification of HI (Highway, Industrial) to IG (Industrial General) or IR (Industrial
Restricted).
OWNER:
HA RSTOWN WASHINGTON COUNTY
IN STRIAE FOUND ION NC.
By: `
Gregory I. Sno k P sident
1131 Conrad Court
Hagerstown, MD 21740
Exhibit #3
HUNT
GREEN
f_.
IG�
RM
RT HI
IG
TOWN
IG IG'
�C•y���vV, C
S� nQA;1
IG
O
NO ,.
SITE
r �
�b D f
H I �P a
�y RAILWAY LN Z
\hgLFwAV B� BG ow 3 A�� .
VO HACFWAy 13,
ro
VALL'EY aQ
yMALL hD t 3
RU
OO °R
° c P B c
r
�Q c,
C VALLEY I,��
BG OAF VALL RID), CNLOE �J°Q.
?p Cokito wI' COWAN
U T� O 09
F
Py EVERGRE O.Q
PINE Cr EN OR ��ls
RM GROVE I RU
WAY OVN� AWN
RT v`°s
IRS BIL
/ RS', RU p�
«
<:
\
2
\jd
q
]
§
§
Q
)
\o
2
/ ° C-1
�)
k
4G§§
�
7
.C-) cd \ \
O � `
O � ƒ
� � »
� � \ � � \\
� O § } §^
� � § § \
° A$
U ]) /§ee5®y
mf{.A&"22°~ ( A/\ 2}§EE)}
o q-]®§kt%/
_ ` j §) t 0\]!;} ¥
Exhibit #5
<
§
§
,
°
r
, , 2
`
0
•
E
,
!
E
/
}
t
■
AGREEMENT OF SALE
THIS AGREEMENT OF SALE ("Agreement") is made as of the Lr f� clay of December, 2017, by
and between HAGERSTOWN WASHINGTON COUNTY INDUSTRIAL FOUNDATION, INC., a
Maryland corporation ("Seiler") and THOMAS BENNETT & HUNTER INC., a Maryland corporation,
or its nominee or assignee ("Buyer"), under the following circumstances:
Seller is the fee simple owner of that certain parcel of real property, located in Washington County,
Maryland located at 11661 Hopewell Road (Map 48, Parcel 572; Tax Acct.-No. 24-000400) containing +/- 19.37
acres of real property (the "Land"). Seller desires to sell the Property (hereinafter defined) to Buyer, and
Buyer desires to acquire the Property.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
ARTICLE I - PURCHASE AND SALE ,
1.1 Pro e . "Property" shall mean, collectively: (a) the Land, (b) all improvements constructed
upon Land, (c) all mineral rights, rights of way or use, servitudes, easements, and appurtenances belonging to
the Land, (d) to the extent of Seller's interest therein, the bed of any street, alley, or road adjoining the Land,
and (e) all land use, zoning, subdivision and other governmental approvals, permits and entitlements which are
applicable to the Land (and including all rights of Seller to any plans and specifications relating thereto,
collectively, the "Plans").
1.2 Purchase and Sale. Seller agrees to sell and Buyer agrees to purchase the Property, upon the
terms and conditions set forth herein.
1.3 Purchase Price. The purchase price to be paid for the Property (the "Purchase Price") shall
be Upon
Buyer's election no later than FIFTEEN (15) days prior to Closing, Seller agrees to accept deferred payment of
a portion of the Purchase Price in an amount not to exceed
(the "Deferred Purchase Price"). The Deferred
Purchase Price shall be paid, with interest on the unpaid principal balance at the fixed rate of FIVE PERCENT
(5%) per annum, pursuant to a FIVE (5) year Promissory Note, amortized over a period of TWENTY (20)
years and secured by Purchase Money Deed of Trust.
1.4 Deposit, Within TWO (2) business days after the Effective Date (hereinafter defined), Buyer
shall deliver to Lincoln Title & Settlement Services ("Escrow Agent" or "Title Company"), the sum of
(the "Deposit"). Except as otherwise
specifically provided for herein, the Deposit shall be fully retundable during the Inspection Period and
Processing Period (defined below). Upon expiration of the Processing Period, the Deposit shall become non-
refundable except in the event of a default by Seller or failure of a Condition Precedent to Closing (defined
below). Notwithstanding the Deposit, or any portion thereof, becoming nonrefundable, 100% of the Deposit
shall be credited to Buyer and applied to the Purchase Price at Closing.
1.5 Escrow Agent. Escrow Agent shall hold and disburse the Deposit in accordance with the
terms and provisions hereof. If a dispute arises between Seller and Buyer concerning the distribution of the
Deposit, Escrow Agent may deposit the Deposit with a court of competent jurisdiction and interplead Seller
and Buyer with respect thereto. Seller and Buyer shall each reimburse Escrow Agent for one-half of any
reasonable costs and expenses incurred by Escrow Agent as a result of any such dispute.
1.6 Inspection Period. (a) Buyer shall have SIXTY (60) days from the Effective Date of this
Agreement (the "Inspection Period") during which to make a physical inspection of the premises and review
all agreements, environmental studies, all available property condition reports, zoning ordinances, title
2542868.1 87085.004
EXHIBIT t
documents, surveys, drawings and all other Seller's Materials (defined below) and to otherwise determine if
the Property is suitable for Buyer's intended use. Without limitation, Buyer may, upon reasonable notice to
Seller, enter upon the Property at any reasonable time to conduct and perform such tests, surveys and
evaluations as Buyer deems necessary. Buyer's right to enter and inspect the property as described above shall
continue until the Closing (or earlier termination of this Agreement as permitted hereby). Buyer shall return the
Property to substantially the same condition in which it was prior to the time of such entry, which obligation
shall survive a termination of this Agreement. All work performed shall be performed without cost or expense
to Seller and Buyer shall indemnify and hold Seller harmless from any liability or loss as a result of said entry,
except to the extent that any such liability or loss is caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of Seller or
any of its agents, employees or contractors. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, prior to entering upon
the Property for any reason, Buyer shall provide to Seller reasonable evidence, which evidence shall identify
Seller and its mortgagee, if any, as an additional insured, that Buyer maintains general liability insurance
coverage in an amount not less than $1,000,000.00 combined single limit and shall require any agent or
contractor of Buyer performing any work on the Property to maintain general liability insurance with a
combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 and naming the Seller and its mortgagee, if any, as
additional insureds. The provisions of this Section 1.6 shall survive Closing or an earlier termination of this
Agreement.
(b) Buyer shall have the right to terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, and for
any or no reason, by providing written notice to Seller prior to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the last day of the
Inspection Period. Upon providing said written notice, the Agreement shall be deemed terminated, the Deposit
shall be returned to Buyer and, except as otherwise expressly provided for in this Agreement, the parties shall
be relieved of any and all further obligations hereunder.
1.7 Seller's Materials. Within THREE (3) days immediately following the Effective Date, Seller
shall deliver to Buyer copies of all surveys, soil tests, property condition reports, environmental reports, traffic
studies, building or site plans, correspondence from any governmental authority, or other similar documents or
reports, if any, which are within Seller's possession or control (collectively, "Seller's Materials"). Seller
makes no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness, methodology of
preparation or otherwise concerning the contents of the Seller's Materials. In the event that the sale
contemplated hereby is not for any reason consummated, all surveys, environmental reports, site plans,
subdivision plats and any other reports for the Property obtained by Buyer shall be delivered by Buyer to Seller
along with an assignment of all rights thereto.
1.8 ProcessingPeriod. Buyer intends to develop the Property for a ready -mixed concrete plant (the
"Intended Use"). Buyer will have THREE HUNDRED SIXTY-FIVE (365) days from the end of the
Inspection Period (the "Processing Period") to seek and obtain all zoning and/or governmental approvals and
other approvals, agreements, or consents that are necessary for Buyer to proceed with Buyer's Intended use of
the Property, including but in no way limited to Buyer's ability to obtain sufficient water and wastewater
allocation capacity, all upon reasonable terms and conditions as determined by Buyer in Buyer's sole and
absolute discretion (collectively, the "Development Approvals"). Buyer will be responsible for the application
and securing of all Development Approvals, subject to Seller's covenant to cooperate with Buyer in connection
therewith. Without limitation, Seller's covenant to cooperate shall include the obligation to execute and join (as
owner of the Property) any application for the Development Approvals, and any other supplemental
documentation required to be submitted in order to process the Development Approvals.
During the Processing Period, upon the expiration of each three (3) month period a ONE THOUSAND
TWO HUNDRED FIFTY AND 00/100 DOLLAR ($1,250.00) portion of the Deposit shall become non-
refundable to Buyer and shall be made available by the Title Company and paid to Seller upon request as in the
nature of an option fee.
Further, during the Processing Period, Buyer will pay to Seller, as in the nature of an option fee, sums
equal to all real property taxes corning due for the Tax Year commencing 7/1/2018 with respect to the Property,
to be paid as follows: as and when such taxes are billed to Seller, Seller shall provide written notice of the
2542868.1 2 87085.004
amount paid and a copy of the tax bill to Buyer; with the expiration of each three (3) month period after the
date of Seller's notice to Buyer, Buyer shall pay an amount equal to 25% of the total tax paid by Seller. Such
amounts paid by Buyer shall immediately be deemed non-refundable and shall be retained by Seller in the
nature of an option fee. In the event that, during the Processing Period, the real property tax assessment of the
Property should increase, Buyer shall have the right to take an appeal thereof, at Buyer's sole expense, and
Seller will fully cooperate therewith.
Buyer shall have the right to two (2), SIXTY (60) day extensions of the Processing Period (each, an
"Extension"). If Buyer elects to extend the Processing Period, then: (i) prior to the then currently scheduled
expiration date of the Processing Period, Buyer shall give notice that it is extending the Processing Period (an
"Extension Notice") by 60 days, and (ii) the Extension Notice shall confirm that an additional TEN
THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($10,000.00) portion of the Deposit shall become non-refundable to
Buyer and shall be made available by the Title Company and paid to Seller upon request as in the nature of an
option fee. Buyer shall provide an Extension Notice for each Extension exercised.
In the event that Buyer is, for any reason, unable to secure any Development Approvals, then Buyer
may terminate the Purchase Agreement by giving written notice to Seller on or before the expiration of the
Processing Period. Upon termination, the Purchase Agreement shall thereafter be null and void and of no
further force and effect, and Buyer shall be entitled to a refund of any portion of the Deposit which has not
become non-refundable as hereinabove set forth.
ARTICLE II - REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES
2.1 Covenants. Representations, and Warranties of Seller. (a) Seller represents and warrants to
Buyer that, to: (1) Seller has not executed any leases, easements, maintenance agreements, service contracts or
other encumbrances or agreements affecting all or any portion of the Property which are not recorded and
which will remain in effect after CIosing; (2) Seller has the power and authority to execute and deliver this
Agreement and to perform all of its obligations hereunder, and upon such execution and delivery, this
Agreement shall be valid and enforceable against Seller in accordance with its terms; (3) Seller is not a party or
to Seller's knowledge, a potential patty to any pending, contemplated, or threatened bankruptcy or similar
proceeding or litigation, under any federal, state, or local law, which might adversely affect the Property or
Seller's ability to perform its obligations hereunder; (4) to Seller's knowledge, the execution of this Agreement
by Seller will not violate any law, rule, regulation, court order, contract, agreement, or commitment or
obligation by which the Property or Seller is affected; (5) except as specifically set forth in any environmental
reports delivered to Buyer as part of Seller's Materials, to Seller's knowledge no hazardous materials are
present or have been released in, on, or under the Property during Seller's ownership of the Property; (6) Seller
is not a "foreign person" as defined in Section 1445(b)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended
("FIRPTA"); and (7) all bills and claims for labor performed or materials furnished to or for the Property have
been fully paid. For purposes hereof, Seller will be deemed to have "knowledge" of a particular fact or other
matter if its Chief Executive Officer has or at any time had (i) actual knowledge, or (ii) that knowledge which a
reasonably prudent business person could have obtained in the management of his or her business affairs after
making due inquiry and exercising due diligence which a prudent business person should have made or
exercised, as applicable, with respect thereto. The foregoing representation and warranties are referred to as
"Seller's Representations." All of Seller's Representations shall be deemed to be remade as of the Closing
Date.
(b) Seller shall execute and deliver to the Title Company at Closing an affidavit (the
"Owner's Affidavit") in form and content reasonably approved by Seller and the Title Company in order to
satisfy any reasonable "seller" requirements for issuance of an ALTA form owner's policy of title insurance
providing standard title coverage ("Title Policy") to Buyer.
2.2 Representations and Warranties of Bu eler. Buyer covenants, represents, and warrants to Seller,
as of the Effective Date and as of the Closing Date, that: (a) Buyer has the power and authority to execute and
deliver this Agreement and to perform all of its obligations hereunder, and upon such execution and delivery,
2542868.1 87085.004
this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable against Buyer in accordance with its terms; (b) Buyer has
sufficient financial resources available and is financially able to consummate the purchase of the Property on
the Closing Date, to pay and perform all obligations to be set forth in the Promissory Note and all other
obligations related to the Deferred Purchase Price, and to pay all other costs which may arise under and in
furtherance of this Agreement; and (c) Buyer is not a party or a potential party to any pending, (to Buyer's
knowledge) threatened bankruptcy or similar proceeding under any federal, state, or local law.
ARTICLE III - CLOSING
3.1 Closina. (a) Closing under this Agreement ("Closing") shall occur at the offices of the Title
Company on a date mutually agreed upon by Buyer and Seller (the "Closing Date"), which date shall not be
later than THIRTY (30) days immediately following the expiration of the Processing Period, as may be
extended (the "Outside Closing Date"), provided Buyer has not terminated this Agreement during the
Inspection Period as provided for hereinabove.
(b) At Closing, Seller shall deliver to the Title Company the following: (i) a special
warranty deed from Seller to Buyer, in form reasonably acceptable to Seller, Buyer and the Title Company,
conveying good and marketable fee simple title to the Property, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances of
any kind, except for Permitted Exceptions (defined below) (the "Deed"); (ii) an affidavit as required under
FIRPTA; (iii) the Owner's Affidavit; (iv) a settlement statement setting forth all amounts to be paid or received
by Buyer or Seller at Closing, as reasonably approved by the parties consistent herewith (the "Settlement
Statement"); (v) such documents and other evidence as are required to satisfy all reasonable requirements for
issuance of the Title Policy by the Title Company other than those imposed upon Buyer; (vi) a reaffirmation of
Seller's Representations as of the Closing Date; and (vii) such other documents as may be reasonably
necessary to consummate Closing. "Permitted Exceptions" shall mean and refer to all easements, covenants,
conditions, restrictions and other title matters encumbering the Land as of the date hereof, or otherwise
permitted under the terms of this Agreement, except for monetary encumbrances, all of which shall be paid by
Seller at or before Closing, and except for any matters which Seller agrees in writing to cure.
(c) At Closing, Buyer shall deliver to the Title Company the following: (i) the balance of
the Purchase Price; (ii) such other amounts as may be necessary to consummate Closing, as shown on the
Settlement Statement; (iii) the Settlement Statement; and (iv) such documents and other evidence as are
required to satisfy all requirements for issuance of the Title Policy by the Title Company and to consummmate
Closing, other than those imposed upon Seller. In the event Buyer so elects, Buyer shall deliver to the Title
Company the Promissory Note, Purchase Money Deed of Trust and any other documents mutually agreed upon
by Buyer and Seller related to the Deferred Purchase Price.
(d) Upon the Title Company's: (i) receipt of all items to be delivered by Seller, above; (ii)
receipt of all finds and items to be delivered Buyer above; and (iii) confirmation that title to the Property is in
the condition required by this Agreement, Title Company shall (A) deliver the Deed to Buyer for immediate
recordation, (B) deliver all other documents held in escrow to the intended recipients, and (C) make all
disbursements required under the Settlement Statement.
3.2 Conditions Precedent to Closing. Buyer's obligation to consummate Closing under and in
accordance with this Agreement shall be contingent upon the following: (i) Seller shall have made all Closing
deliveries required of Seller under this Agreement; (ii) Seller's Representations shall continue to be true and
correct as of the Closing Date, as though made and given on such date; and (iii) Buyer shall have not earlier
terminated this Agreement during the Inspection Period or Processing Period.
If any of the conditions in this Section are not satisfied, deemed approved or waived by Buyer, other
than due to the default of Seller or Buyer under this Agreement (in which event the provisions of Section 5.1
shall apply), then Buyer may terminate this Agreement by written notice to the Seller, in which event, except
as otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement, the Deposit shall be immediately returned to Buyer by
the Escrow Agent and this Agreement and the rights and obligations of the parties hereunder shall terminate;
2542868.1 4 87095.004
3.3 Costs, Adjustments, and Indemnities. (a) Buyer shall be responsible for all costs and expenses
of its due diligence, any investigation, consulting fees and attorneys' fees and expenses associated therewith,
including the cost of title investigation and Title Policy premiums. Except as provided herein, Seller and
Buyer shall each be responsible for their respective attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in the negotiation of
this Agreement and the consummation of Closing. The costs of all documentary stamps, recordation taxes, and
transfer taxes payable in connection with the conveyance of the Land shall be paid one-half by each of Seller
and Buyer; provided, however, that any agricultural transfer taxes due and payable on the +/- 8 acre portion of
the Property with an Agricultural Use assessment shall be paid by Seller.
(b) All items of income and expense relating to the Property, including without limitation
real estate taxes and utilities, are to be adjusted between Buyer and Seller as of the Closing Date, provided that
if Closing occurs before the applicable tax rate or assessed valuation are fixed for the period during which
Closing occurs, the adjustment of real estate taxes shall be based upon the tax rate and assessed valuation for
the most recent period for which both such items are known. Promptly after such items are fixed for period
during which Closing occurs, the parties shall further adjust real estate taxes based upon the fixed values of
such items. Any service contracts or maintenance agreements affecting the Property shall be terminated by
Seller as of the Closing Date.
ARTICLE IV - CONDEMNATION
If, subsequent to the date of this Agreement and prior to the Closing, a material part of the Property is
taken in the exercise of the power of eminent domain, which taking in Buyer's reasonable discretion has an
adverse effect on the development of the Property for its intended use, Seller shall give prompt written notice
thereof to Buyer, and Buyer may, by written notice to Seller, elect to terminate this Agreement, in which event
the Deposit shall be returned to Buyer, and, except as otherwise expressly set forth herein, Seller and Buyer
shall have no further rights or obligations hereunder. If no election to terminate is made by Buyer, this
Agreement will remain in full force and effect and the purchase and sale contemplated herein, less any interest
taken by eminent domain, will be effected with no further adjustment, and Seller will, at the Closing, assign,
transfer, and set over to Buyer all Seller's rights, title, and interest in and to any awards that have been or that
may thereafter be made for such taking. In such event, Seller will cooperate fully with Buyer (at no out-of-
pocket expense to Seller) to maximize the award payable in respect of such taking, and in no event will Seller
enter into any agreement with respect to any such award without Buyer's written consent.
ARTICLE V — RISK OF LOSS / CASUALTY
Risk of loss with respect to the Property shall remain with Seller until Closing is completed. Seller
shall maintain in full force and effect all of Seller's existing fire and extended coverage insurance on the
Property, if any, until the Closing Date. Seller's existing insurance policy, if any, shall be canceled as of the
Closing Date and Buyer shall obtain new insurance at such time. If, prior to the Closing Date, any building or
other improvement on the Property is damaged or destroyed by any cause in any amount, Seller shall promptly
notify Buyer and Buyer shall have the option to terminate this Contract by notice to Seller (such notice to be
given within five (5) days after Buyer is given notice of such damage or destruction) or to proceed with this
transaction, in which latter event Buyer shall receive all proceeds of insurance payable by reason of such
damage or destruction; provided, however, that if such damage or destruction is in an amount which is equal to
or less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the replacement cost of the improvements and fixtures constituting a
portion of the Property, Buyer shall not have the option to terminate this Contract if Seller shall agree in
writing to (a) promptly cause such damaged building or improvement to be replaced or restored to the
condition it was in prior to such damage or destruction or (b) deliver to Buyer on the Closing Date (or subtract
from the Purchase Price an amount equal to the sum of) all proceeds of insurance payable by reason of such
damage or destruction together with the additional amount, if any, which is required to replace or restore such
damaged building or improvement to the condition it was in prior to such damage or destruction. If Buyer
elects to cancel this Contract pursuant to this Article V, Seller shall cause the Escrow Agent to refund the
Deposit to Buyer, and neither party shall thereafter have any further rights, duties or liabilities under this
Agreement.
2542868.1 5 87085.004
ARTICLE VI - DEFAULT; REMEDIES
5.1 Default, Remedies. (a) If Buyer breaches its representations or warranties or otherwise
defaults in any of its obligations under this Agreement, Seller, as its sole and exclusive remedy, may terminate
this Agreement by written notice to Buyer and receive the Deposit as full and complete liquidated damages.
(b) If Seller breaches any representation or warranty made hereunder or otherwise defaults
in any of its obligations under this Agreement, the sole and exclusive remedies of Buyer with respect to such
failure shall be (i) the right to terminate this Agreement by written notice to Seller and obtain the return of the
Deposit, or (ii) the right to seek specific performance.
5.2 Cure of Default. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no breach
or failure by Seller or Buyer hereunder shall give rise to the exercise by the other of any remedies hereunder,
including without limitation the termination of this Agreement, unless the non -breaching party has notified the
breaching party of such breach in writing, and the breaching party shall have failed to cure such breach or
failure within TEN (10) business days after receipt of such written notice thereof, except that no such notice or
right to cure shall be required by in relation to the failure of either Buyer or Seller to consummate Closing as
and when required hereunder.
ARTICLE VII - GENERAL
6.1 Notices. Notices and other communications required or permitted to be given hereunder shall
be deemed to have been duly given if in writing and delivered by recognized overnight delivery service, or by
electronic mail (with a hard copy sent within ONE (1) business day thereafter by overnight delivery), as
follows: (i) if to Seller, to 1131 Conrad Court, Hagerstown, MD 21740, Attn: Greg Snook (email:
gsnook( chiefhag.conu), with a courtesy copy to Brian A. Kane, Esq., Kane, Wilburn & Stone, P.A., 28 West
Washington Street, 31 Floor, Hagerstown, MD 21740 (email: bkane(g)kanewilburnstonc.com); and (ii) if to
Buyer, to 70 John Street, Westminster, MD 21157, Attn: Kevin W. Beaver, President (email:
kevin.beaver Q tblico)1cl'ete.conl); with a courtesy copy to Jason M. Divelbiss, Esq., 13424 Pennsylvania
Avenue, Suite 302, Hagerstown, MD 21742 (email: jdivelbiss@divelbisslaw.col»). Any party may change
the address to which such notices, requests, demands, and other communications are to be directed by giving
written notice of such new address to all other parties in the manner provided above. Any notice, request,
demand, or other communication shall be deemed received upon the earlier of (i) the date of the e-mail if
received by 5 p.m. local time of a business day, (ii) actual delivery thereof, (iii) any refusal of such delivery, or
(iv) if such delivery is impossible because of the intended recipient's failure to provide the other party with
notice of an address change, upon any attempt of such delivery to the address(es) set forth above.
6.2 Broker. Each of Seller and Buyer represents and warrants to the other that it has not engaged
or otherwise dealt with any brokers, finders or other intermediaries in connection with the transaction
contemplated hereby other than Sydney Machat ("Seller's Broker"). Seller agrees to pay Seller's Broker a
commission pursuant to separate agreement with Seller. Each of Seller and Buyer agrees to indemnify, defend,
and hold the other harmless from and against any and all claims arising out of the breach of the foregoing
indemnifying party's representation and warranty. The obligations of the parties under this paragraph shall
survive Closing and delivery of the Deed.
6.3 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the
parties hereto and their respective successors, heirs, administrators and assigns. Buyer shall not have the right
to assign Buyer's interest under this Agreement without Seller's consent, unless such assignment by Buyer is
to an entity of which Buyer of an affiliate of Buyer controls and owns a majority interest (and provided Buyer
gives Seller prompt written Notice of said assignment) Such permitted assignment shall not release Buyer from
its obligations hereunder.
6.4 Waiver of Jury Trial. EACH PARTY HEREBY WAIVES TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY
PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT BY THE OTHER PARTY IN CONNECTION WITH ANY MATTER
ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE TRANSACTION, THIS AGREEMENT,
2542868.1 6 87085.004
THE PROPERTY OR THE RELATIONSHIP OF BUYER AND SELLER HEREUNDER. THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL SURVIVE THE CLOSING (AND NOT BE MERGED
THEREIN) OR ANY EARLIER TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT.
6.5 Survival. Except as otherwise provided herein, all covenants, agreements, representations and
warranties set forth in this Agreement or in any certificate or instrument executed or delivered pursuant to this
Agreement shall not survive Closing and shall be merge into any deed, assignment or other instrument
executed or delivered pursuant hereto.
6.6 Prevailing Party. In the event of any action to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the
substantially prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable costs and attorneys' fees from the substantially
non -prevailing party. For purposes of this Section 6.6, "substantially prevailing party" means the net winner in
an action, taking into account the claims pursued, the claims on which the pursuing party was successful, the
relief sought, the relief awarded, and offsets or counterclaims pursued (successfully or unsuccessfully) by the
other party. If a written settlement offer is rejected and the judgment or award finally obtained is equal to or
more favorable to the offeror than an offer made in writing to settle, the offeror is deemed to be the
substantially prevailing party from the date of the offer forward.
6.4 Miscellaneous. (a) No failure or delay by any party in exercising any right or discretion
hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise of any such right or
discretion preclude any other exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right or discretion. (b) No waiver
shall be effective unless in writing and executed on behalf of the party granting such waiver. (c) This
Agreement shall binding and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective heirs, successors and
assigns. (d) This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts which, when assembled, shall
constitute a single original. (e) Delivery by e-mail of a PDF copy of this Agreement shall constitute good and
valid delivery. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Maryland, without regard to any
conflict of laws principles, and any action for the breach or enforcement hereof shall be brought in a court of
competent jurisdiction within the State of Maryland. (f) The "Effective Date" of this Agreement will be the
date that the Agreement is fully executed and delivered by the parties.
6.5 As -Is Sale and Purchase.
(a) AS -IS. Buyer is purchasing the property in its existing condition, "as -is, where -
is, with all faults" as of the effective date, and will, by the closing date, have made or have waived all
inspections and investigations of the property and its vicinity which buyer believes are necessary to
protect its own interest in, and its contemplated use of, the property.
(b) NO REPRESENTATIONS. Other than the express representations and warranties
of seller contained in this agreement or the closing documents, neither seller, its members, nor any
person or entity acting by or on behalf of seller, or any officer, director, employee, agent, affiliate,
successor or assign of any of the foregoing has made any representation, warranty, inducement, promise,
agreement, assurance or statement, oral or written, of any kind to buyer upon which buyer is relying, or
in connection with which buyer has made or will make any decisions concerning the property.
(c) NO IMPLIED WARRANTIES. Other than the express representations and
warranties of seller contained in this agreement or the closing documents, seller hereby disclaims all
warranties implied by law arising out of or with respect to the execution of this agreement, any aspect or
element of the property, or the performance of seller's obligations hereunder including, without
limitation, all implied warranties of merchantability and/or fitness for a particular purpose.
6.5 Like -kind Exchange. Seller, at any time prior to the Closing Date, may elect to effect a
simultaneous or non -simultaneous tax -deferred exchange pursuant to Section 1031, and the regulations
2542868.1 7 87085.004
pertaining thereto, of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Buyer expressly agrees to cooperate
with Seller in connection with any such exchange in any manner which shall not impose any additional cost or
liability upon Buyer, including without limitation by executing any and all documents, including escrow
instructions or agreements consenting to Seller's assignment of its rights and obligations hereunder to an
exchange entity, which may be necessary to carry out such an exchange; provided, however, that Buyer shall
not be required to take title to any property in order to accommodate Seller in effecting the exchange; and
provided further, however, that Seller's election to effect such an exchange shall not delay the Closing Date.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first
written above.
SELLER:
HAGERSTOWN WASIHNGTON COUNTY
IND STRIAL TOUND TION, IN .
By: I
Name:
Title:
BUYER:
THOMAS BENNET & HUNTER, INC.
By: ld
Kevin W. Beaver, President
ESCROW AGENT:
LINCOLN TITLE & SETTLEMENT SERVICES
By:
Name: B' h
Title:
2542868.1 8 87085.004
LIST OF NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF ALL ADJOINING AND CONFRONTING
PROPERTY OWNERS
1. Barbara Stephensen & Ronald E. Brown
a. Premises Address: 11615 Hopewell Rd., Hagerstown, MD 21740
b. Mailing Address: 1500 Philadelphia Ave., Chambersburg, PA 17201
c. Map: 0048
d. Parcel: 0007
e. Account ID: 24-000540
2. Purina Mills, Inc. Land O Lakes
a. Premises Address: 11671 Hopewell Rd., Hagerstown, MD 21740
b. Mailing Address: c/o Land O Lakes P.O. Box 64101 MS 4015, St. Paul, MN
55614
c. Map: 0048
d. Parcel: 0868
e. Account ID: 24-005259
3. 2004 Halfway Boulevard LLC
a.
Premises Address:
16804 & 16814 Blake Rd., Hagerstown, MD 21740
b.
Mailing Address:
11535 Hopewell Rd., P.O. Box 4217, Hagerstown, MD
21741
c.
Map:
0048
d.
Parcel:
0006
e.
Account ID:
24-001067
4. CSX Minerals
a.
Premises Address:
Halfway Blvd, Hagerstown, MD 21740
b.
Mailing Address:
500 Water St. J-910, Jacksonville, FL 32202
c.
Map:
0048
d.
Parcel:
0796
e.
Account ID:
26-036356
5. The Bowman Group LLP
a.
Premises Address:
16921 Halfway Blvd., Hagerstown, MD 21740
b.
Mailing Address:
10228 Governor Lane Blvd. Ste. 3002, Williamsport, MD
21795
c.
Map:
0048
d.
Parcel:
0008
e.
Account ID:
24-009971
CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PAGE
EXHIBIT
1
March, 2018 Case #: RZ-18-001
Application for Map Amendment
Staff Report and Analysis
Property Owner(s) : Hagerstown-Washington County Industrial
Foundation (CHIEF)
Applicant(s) : Thomas Bennett & Hunter, Inc.
Location : 1/10 mile NE of intersection of Halfway Rd &
Hopewell Blvd
Election District : #24 – Cedar Lawn
Comprehensive Plan
Designation : Industrial Flex
Tax Map : 48
Parcel(s) : 572
Acreage : 19.37 acres
Existing Zoning : HI – Highway Interchange
Requested Zoning : IG – Industrial, General
Date of Hearing : March 5, 2018
I. Background and Findings Analysis:
1. Site Description
Parcel 572 is located in the Urban Growth Area that surrounds the City of
Hagerstown as well as the Towns of Funkstown and Williamsport. More specifically, the
property is found .1 miles northeast of the intersection of Halfway Boulevard and
Hopewell Road in the Hopewell Valley Economic Development Area.
The site itself is 19.37 acres in size, 7.63 acres of which is forested. Of the 7.63 acres
of forested area, 3.85 acres is currently protected within a permanent forest easement
which forms the western and northwestern boundary of the property. The topography of
the site is hilly, contains rock outcroppings in the forested area, and slopes gently
downward from east to west. Outside of the forest areas, the remaining acreage has been
cleared and left unimproved, or is being cultivated.
The intersection of Halfway Blvd and Hopewell Road has been developed to serve
the needs of the industrial and commercial development in the Hopewell Valley area, as
well as the I-81 traffic generated from adjacent exit 5. The intersection contains a variety
of truck stops, gas stations and automotive sales, service and repair shops.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 2
2
2. Population Analysis
To evaluate the change in population, information was compiled from the US Census
Bureau over a thirty-year time frame. A thirty year horizon was chosen to show long
term population trends both in the election district of the proposed rezoning, as well as
the overall trends of the County.
Parcel 527 is located within the Cedar Lawn Election District (#24), a sparsely
populated election district characterized mostly by extensive industrial and commercial
land uses. Residential areas are confined mostly to the northern part of the election
district, constituting portions of the West End of Hagerstown. As shown in the table
below however, the population in this district has grown more rapidly than the
County has over the thirty year time frame between 1980 and 2010. District 24 has
grown 53.6% over the thirty year period (1.8% per year) while the County as a whole has
increased in population by 30.36% (1.01% per year) during the same period.
Table 1: Cedar Lawn District Population Trends
Year Area Population
% change from
previous
decade
District 867
County 113086
District 1129 30.2%
County 121393 7.3%
District 1131 0.2%
County 131932 8.7%
District 1332 17.8%
County 147430 11.7%2010
Population Trends 1980 - 2010
1980
1990
2000
Source: US Census Bureau
3. Availability of Public Facilities
A. Water and Sewerage
The adopted Water and Sewerage Plan for the County establishes the policies and
recommendations for public water and sewer infrastructure to help guide development in
a manner that helps promote healthy and adequate service to citizens. By its own decree,
the purpose of the Washington County Water and Sewerage Plan is “…to provide for the
continued health and well-being of Washington County residents and our downstream
neighbors…”1 This is achieved through implementing recommendations within the
County Comprehensive Plan and the Water and Sewerage Plan to provide for services in
a timely and efficient manner and by establishing an inventory of existing and
programmed services.
1 Washington County, Maryland Water and Sewerage Plan 2009 Update, Page I-2
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 3
3
Water:
W1-Existing Service (County Line-City Treatment)
The parcel is served by existing (W-1) public water facilities as they are
located within the Urban Growth Area. Water service in this area is provided by
the City of Hagerstown at its treatment plant. The County owns the distribution
system.
The City of Hagerstown Water Division offered no comment on the
proposed development when sent the application for review.
Wastewater:
Split: Northern Half: S-1-Existing Service (County)
Southern Half: S-3 Programmed Service (County)
Existing sewerage service (S-1) is currently available on only the northern half of
the parcel adjacent to Hopewell Road. The County owns the collection system and
handles the effluent treatment at the Conococheague Wastewater Treatment Plant. The
southern half of the parcel was designated as S-3 Programmed Service within the 2009
Water and Sewerage Plan.
The Washington County Department of Water Quality, the wastewater provider for
this area, had no comments on this application.
B. Emergency Services
Fire and Emergency Services:
Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway (1114 Lincoln Avenue) – 1 mile away
The subject parcel is located within the service area of the Volunteer Fire
Company of Halfway. This same entity also provides the nearest emergency rescue
services. Their station is located approximately 1 mile away from the property in
question.
A copy of this application was sent to Halfway Fire Company as well as to the
Washington County Division of Emergency Services. No comments were received.
Schools
Elementary – Jonathan Hager, Middle – Springfield, High School - Williamsport
The subject site is within the districts of Jonathan Hager, Springfield Middle and
Williamsport High schools. The requested zoning classification, Industrial General (IG),
does not allow for residential development. Therefore, there would be no school
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 4
4
capacity mitigation requirements for pupil generation under the County’s Adequate
Public Facilities Ordinance.
4. Present and Future Transportation Patterns
Highways - Access and Traffic Volume
The subject property is located on Hopewell Road slightly northeast of that road’s
intersection with Halfway Boulevard. Hopewell Road is classified as a Minor Collector
in the Transportation Element of the County’s 2002 Comprehensive Plan, in terms of
mobility and access characteristics. Minor Collector roads are designed to carry
between 1,000 and 3,000 vehicles in urban areas in Average Daily Traffic. The County’s
classifications system is based upon the Federal Highway Functional Classification
System, but modified to reflect local road conditions. The section of Halfway Boulevard
adjacent to the proposed rezoning is also classified as a Minor Collector in the 2002
Comprehensive Plan.
Parcel 527 has approximately 900 feet of road frontage on Hopewell Road. An
existing right turn lane runs in front of the northeast corner of the property, primarily to
provide access to the adjacent Purina Mills facility. An existing macadam driveway
spurs off of northbound Hopewell Road roughly 500 feet south of the Purina Mills
entrance road, providing its only current access. The driveway ends at a gate after a short
distance and the pavement largely disappears into the forest shortly beyond the gate.
There is no middle turn lane on Hopewell Road in the vicinity of the property.
Approximately 1 mile west of the parcel subject to this rezoning, Halfway
Boulevard is to be extended ½ mile in length and connect to MD 63/Greencastle Pike.
The project, titled Halfway Boulevard Extended Phase 1 in the County’s current
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), has been allotted $2.049 million for engineering/design,
construction and inspection from 2018 – 2020. Federal grants will provide $1.9 million
of this total, with the remainder provided by the County through tax supported bonds.
The extended roadway will provide an alternate access route to MD 63 and I-70 for
heavy truck traffic traveling to or from the industrial park on Halfway Boulevard
Extended. Phase II of this same project on Halfway Blvd allots $2 million for the
construction of a new bridge across an unnamed tributary of Conococheague Creek,
funded through bonds and contributions.
In addition to evaluating public access of a parcel for rezoning purposes, it is also
important to evaluate traffic generation and existing traffic volumes. This is commonly
accomplished through analysis of historic and existing traffic counts as well as any
existing traffic impact studies. Traffic counts from the Maryland State Highway
Administration (SHA), and the Washington County Department of Engineering (DOE)
were recorded at a select few points in the vicinity of the proposed rezoning. SHA’s
closest traffic counts occurred near the intersection of MD 144 and Hopewell Road,
roughly 1.5 miles north of the site. DOE traffic counts occurred in 2008 and 2016 in
four places surrounding the intersection of Halfway Boulevard and Hopewell Road.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 5
5
These counts offer the most stable location during the 30-year time period surveyed
below. The traffic volume data shown in the table is expressed in annual average daily
traffic volumes (ADT).
Table 2:
SHA Traffic Volumes 1985-2015 2016 DOE Traffic Volumes
Year MD 144/West
Washington St.
Counter
Location Year of Halfway
Blvd &
2015 5112 Adjacent to site,
Hopewell Rd
2008
2016
7237
6722
2010 4640 WB Halfway
Blvd
2008
2016
4948
2802
2005 4750 EB Halfway Blvd 2008
2016
4948
2863
2000 9525
Hopewell Rd NB,
south of
intersection
2008
2016
4583
3016
1995 4475
Hopewell Rd SB,
south of
intersection
2008
2016
4583
4773
The data contained in Table 2 above offers a mixed picture of the change in traffic
volumes in the vicinity of this proposed rezoning. The left half of the table (colored light
gray) reveals that traffic volume near the intersection of MD 144 and Hopewell Road has
declined by 46% between 2000 and 2015. At the same time, ADT grew by 10.2%
between 2010 and 2015. Overall, it would be fair to say other than the outlier count in
2000 where traffic nearly doubled at this intersection, ADT has remain consistently
between 4,000 – 5,000 for much of the 30 year period in question.
County traffic counts were performed by consultants in 2008 and in 2016 in four
locations surrounding the intersection of Halfway Boulevard and Hopewell Road. These
figures are noted in the right side of the table (colored gray). Only one of these four
locations, southbound Hopewell Road, shows an increase in ADT between 2008 and
2016. That counter noted just a 4.1 percent increase in traffic by 2016 (or .5% per year).
The other three locations at which counts were taken, including one immediately west of
the proposed rezoning site on Hopewell Road, showed notable decreases in traffic
between 2008 and 2016.
Source: Maryland State Highway Administration; Washington County Dept. of Engineering
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 6
6
Overall, traffic seems to be flat or declining in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed rezoning site, according to the data presented above.
The rezoning application was sent to the Division of Engineering Plan Review, which
offered no comment.
Public Transportation
This area is not served by Washington County Transit. The Hopewell Express
provides a free shuttle service to employees of Hopewell Road businesses from
downtown Hagerstown. The shuttle service, provided by the Washington County
Community Action Council, operates Monday – Friday from approximately 6 am - 8 pm.
5. Compatibility with Existing and Proposed Development in the Area:
The subject parcel is presently zoned Highway Interchange (HI) and is requesting to
change its zoning to Industrial, General (IG). The purpose of the IG zoning district is:
“… to provide appropriate locations for manufacturing, processing, and other heavy
industrial uses which may require extensive transportation, water and/or sewerage
facilities, or open space, because of the number of employees, the type of manufacturing
operation or any by-products which might result from the use.”2
Select principal permitted uses within this zoning district include the
manufacture of automobiles, chemical processing, grain milling, feed storage,
recycling facilities and correctional institutions. Any use permitted in the Industrial,
Restricted (IR) zoning district is also permitted in the IG zoning district. New
development in an IG zoning district must be served by public water and sewer facilities.
A site plan with an approved Forest Stand Delineation and Forest Conservation Plan is
required for any principal permitted or approved special exception use except agriculture.
2 Washington County Zoning Ordinance, Article 14, p. 124.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 7
7
Map 1 shows zoning in the vicinity of the parcel subject to this rezoning (outlined
in green). As can be observed above, west of I-81, the zoning is overwhelmingly either
HI or IG, in keeping with the developmental character of the Hopewell Valley area. The
subject parcel itself is surrounded on all sides by HI zoning, however, it is separated only
by a single parcel to the northeast from the nearest IG zoning district. A small amount of
residential zoning can be found east of the CSX rail line, immediately north and south of
the intersection of I-81 and I-70, including the Lakeside Mobile Home Park and
Hopewell Manor Apartments.
Land use in the area surrounding the property follows naturally with the zoning
described above. Purina Mills, Performance Pipe and Wantz Distributors can be found
immediately north of the subject site on Hopewell Road. Pilot Travel Center, Exxon,
Freightliner Body Shop and S & S Tire Services are among the commercial businesses
located at the intersection of Halfway and Hopewell.
Another important component of compatibility is the location of historic
structures on and around the parcels being proposed for rezoning. According to the
Washington County Historic Sites Survey there are four existing historic site located
within a 0.5 mile radius of the proposed rezoning areas. These sites are described below.
Map 1: Surrounding Zoning Classifications
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 8
8
Existing historic sites within ½ mile:
• WA-I-232: “Schindel-Dutton Farm” – mid-19th century farm complex with 2-
story log home with German Siding and 1862 brick bank barn on 44 acres.
• WA-I-348: Early 19th century farm complex with 2-story limestone farmhouse,
stone outbuilding, stone bank barn on 7 acres.
• WA-I-350: “Ridenour Farm” – 18th century farm complex with brick cased log
home, wood frame shed and concrete silo on 2 acres.
6. Relationship of the Proposed Change to the Adopted Plan for the County:
The purpose of a Comprehensive Plan is to evaluate the needs of the community and
balance the different types of growth to create a harmony between different land uses. In
general, this is accomplished through evaluation of existing conditions, projections of
future conditions, and creation of a generalized land use plan that promotes compatibility
while maintaining the health, safety, and welfare of the general public.
The 2002 Washington County Comprehensive Plan designates eight policy areas
specific to Urban and Town Growth Areas. The property subject to this rezoning is
located in the Industrial Flex sub-policy area. The Comprehensive Plan offers the
following definition for this policy area:
“This classification reflects a hybrid policy area comprised of different
types of development associated land uses. It’s an outgrowth of changes
in the workplace as more jobs move from manufacturing to the hi-tech and
service sectors of the economy. Existing and anticipated land uses
associated with this policy area include light industrial parks, office parks,
research and development facilities, hi-tech communication and
technology facilities, trucking and distribution facilities and minor
commercial uses that support job centers.”3
The Hopewell Valley Economic Development Area is specifically noted
within the IF definition as an employment center representative of the policy area.
Map 2, shown below, displays the parcel’s designation in the 2002
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan within the context of its surroundings.
3 2002 Washington County, Maryland Comprehensive Plan, Pages 242-243.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 9
9
Map 3: 2002 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations
7. “Change or Mistake” Rule
When rezonings are not part of a comprehensive rezoning by the governing body,
individual map amendments (also known as piecemeal rezonings) are under an obligation
to meet the test of the “Change or Mistake” Rule. The “Change or Mistake” Rule
requires proof by the applicant that there has been either: a substantial change in the
character in of the neighborhood since the last comprehensive zoning plan, or a mistake
in designating the existing zoning classification.
As part of the evaluation to determine whether the applicant has proven whether
there has been either a change or mistake in the zoning of a parcel, the Maryland
Annotated Code Land Use Article and the Washington County Zoning Ordinance state
that the local legislative body is required to make findings of fact on at least six different
criteria in order to ensure that a consistent evaluation of each case is provided. Those
criteria include: 1) population change; 2) the availability of public facilities; 3) present
and future transportation patterns; 4) compatibility with existing and proposed
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 10
10
development for the area; 5) the recommendation of the planning commission; and 6) the
relationship of the proposed amendment to the local jurisdiction’s Comprehensive Plan.
Even when change or mistake has been sufficiently sustained, it merely allows the
local governing body the authority to change the zoning; it does not require the change.
When conditions are right for a change the new zone must be shown to be appropriate
and logical for the location and consistent with the County’s Comprehensive Plan.
II. Staff Analysis:
The analysis of a rezoning request begins with a strong presumption that the
current zoning is correct. It is assumed that the governing body performed sufficient
analysis, exercised care, and gave adequate consideration to all known concerns when
zoning was applied to a parcel of land. However, there are instances by which a case can
be established to show that the governing body either erred in establishment of the proper
zoning of a property or that enough change has occurred within the neighborhood
surrounding the property since the governing body’s last assessment to require a new
evaluation of the established zoning designation.
The applicant of this case has indicated in their justification statement that they
believe that there has been a mistake in the designation of the existing zoning
classification. As noted in the prior section describing the “Change or Mistake” Rule, the
Washington County’s Zoning Ordinance requires data to be presented to the local
legislative body on factors such as population change, present and future traffic patterns,
the availability of public facilities, the relationship of the proposed change to the
Comprehensive Plan and its compatibility with existing and proposed development in
order to determine how the area subject to rezoning has evolved over time. Maryland
case law has consistently established that evidence of these factors must be considered
cumulatively, not individually, if the applicant is to demonstrate proof of a mistake in the
designation of the current zoning. Correspondingly, a substantial change in any one
individual factor doesn’t necessarily illustrate that substantial change has occurred in the
neighborhood overall.
A. Evidence for Mistake in the Current Zoning
In order to demonstrate that a mistake was made by the regulatory body in applying
the existing zoning classification to the parcel, the applicant must establish error occurred
as a result of factors such as:
1. A failure to take into account projects or trends probable of fruition,
2. Decisions based on erroneous information,
3. Facts that later prove to be incorrect,
4. Events that have occurred since the current zoning, or
5. Ignoring facts in evidence at the time of zoning application.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 11
11
The last Comprehensive Rezoning in Washington County was completed in 2012,
affecting the Urban Growth Area (UGA) that surrounds the City of Hagerstown and the
towns of Williamsport and Funkstown. The Rezoning affected approximately 17,000
parcels and 38,000 acres of land.4 The input of property owners, local officials, staff and
the general public was solicited and considered in the assignment of each parcel affected
by the Comprehensive Rezoning.
The applicant contends that a mistake was made by the governing body in the failure
to assign an industrial zoning classification instead of the current HI zoning. The
applicant contends that the retention of the existing zoning class in 2012 was a mistake
principally because the following facts weren’t fully considered:
1. “the existing, predominantly industrial nature of Hopewell Valley; and”
2. “the reasonably foreseeable future trend of industrial use intensification”
3. Character of Property
a) Adjacent to active rail line
b) 2/10 mi (linear distance)/1/2 mi (driving distance) from I-81
c) Minimal separation from existing block of IG zoning to north
In considering the above information presented by the applicant, it is important to
separate what is fact from what is speculative. First, the predominantly industrial
character of the Hopewell Valley did indeed exist in 2012. The Hopewell Valley area has
been targeted a region for concentrated economic development of an
industrial/commercial nature since the late 20th century. Therefore, the industrial nature
of the area has not arisen unexpectedly or organically in the time since 2012. Long range
land use planning has intentionally steered the area to develop as it has over time.
Second, the site specific characteristics of Parcel 527 noted by the applicant are also
accurate. The property is adjacent to the active CSX rail line. It is also located a short
linear and driving distance from the I-81 interchange and is also separated by a single
parcel from the block of IG zoning districts located immediately to the north.
Whether or not these specific characteristics make the property substantially better
suited to industrial (IG) versus commercial development (HI) isn’t entirely clear. CHIEF
nearly closed a deal to put a tenant (GTI) on the property as recently as 2016 under the
current zoning, recording a development plat in the process (Washington County Plat
10632). It was only the failure of GTI to obtain a competitive contract that caused the
development of the property to stall.
The third contention made by the applicant, that there is a “trend toward industrial use
intensification,” is more speculative in nature and may not necessarily apply to the parcel
subject to this rezoning. Parcel 527 in fact has been zoned either HI or HI-1 for more
than 20 years. Records indicate that the property was rezoned HI-1 in 1995 (RZ-95-
06.2).
4 Washington County Ordinance No. ORD-2012-08
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 12
12
The HI-1 zoning district “is intended to include those lands closest to the seventeen
interchanges of the interstate highway system traversing Washington County.5 Neither
HI nor HI-1 delineate their specific principal permitted uses, drawing instead those
principal permitted uses from BL, BG, PB and IR zoning districts. Unlike the HI district
however, HI-1 does not allow principal permitted uses from the ORT zoning district.
As can be seen below in Map 2, there was a clear intent in the zoning, both before and
after the Comprehensive Rezoning of the UGA in 2012, to guide commercial
development towards the interstate interchanges in the southern portion of Hopewell
Valley, while guiding more intensive industrial uses to the northern part of Hopewell
Valley. This is why one observes a fairly consistent line dividing the solid block of HI
or HI-1 zoning districts from IG zoning districts, both before and after 2012.
Map 2: Zoning Comparison
2012 Zoning Current Zoning
In rezoning the southern block of parcels (which includes Parcel 527) from HI-1 to HI
in 2012, there was a clear intent to attempt to bring the zoning even more closely in line
with Industrial/Flex recommendation of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan. By bringing in
the principal uses allowed in the ORT district after rezoning from HI-1 to HI, it enabled
the area to solicit the type of “hi-tech” and “service sector” jobs mentioned in the
definition of the IF policy area. Such a strategy would position these types of employers
advantageously near the interchanges, while buffering the interchange vicinity from
externalities such as heavy truck traffic, noise or noxious emissions that can result from
the intensive industrial operations permitted within the IG zoning district.
5 Washington County Zoning Ordinance, Article 19A, p.188.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 13
13
Accordingly, while it may be hard at first to discern the differences on the ground
between these the HI and IG zoning districts in Hopewell Valley, there are subtle
differences. The intersection of Hopewell Road and Halfway Boulevard is a good
example of this, as it contains primarily gas stations and automotive/truck repair/service
businesses and even a Super 8 motel. These service oriented businesses are certainly
qualitatively different land uses from the manufacturing or warehousing operations at
Purina Mills or Wantz Distributors up Hopewell Road to the north.
Thus, to begin to erode this subtle dividing line between the HI and IG zoning blocks
through piecemeal rezoning is to open the possibility of bringing the externalities from
intensive industrial operations into closer proximity with the adjacent I-81 and I-70
interchanges. It seems evident in observing the zoning from 1995 to the present day, that
there has been an intentional effort to avoid these issues by maintaining a fairly consistent
separation of heavy industrial operations from the immediate vicinity of the I-81 and I-70
interchanges in this area. Long range land use planning has indeed encouraged industrial
intensification in northern Hopewell Valley, but not in southern Hopewell Valley where
operations may impact optimal function of the land and transportation system
surrounding the interstate interchanges.
B. Industrial Restricted (IR) v. Industrial General (IG)
An assertion is also made by the applicant that a change in zoning from HI to IG
would result in little potential change in land use from what is currently allowed. On
page three of the applicant’s justification statement, an examination is made of the
commonalities of the HI, IR and IG zoning districts. In essence, the applicant claims that
because all of the IR zoning district’s principal permitted uses are allowed in an HI
zoning district (excluding heliports and communication towers), and the IG zoning
district also permits industrial and manufacturing uses, that the change in zoning from HI
to IG would be negligible.
This argument makes a false equivalency between the three zoning districts which is
evident merely from observing their statements of purpose in Washington County’s
Zoning Ordinance. (Emphasis added)
1. Highway Interchange (HI)
• “… provide suitable locations for commercial activities or light industrial uses
that serve highway travelers, provide goods and services to a regional
population, or uses that have a need to be located near the interstate highway
system to facilitate access by a large number of employees, or receipt or
shipment of goods by highway vehicles. In addition to providing accessible
locations, the Highway Interchange District is intended to promote the safe
and efficient operation of the interchange and to promote its visual
attractiveness.”6
6 Washington County Zoning Ordinance Article 19, p.180.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 14
14
2. Industrial Restricted (IR)
• “… provide locations for low intensity manufacturing and assembly processes
which may not require extensive measures to allow compatibility with
adjacent land uses.”7
3. Industrial General (IG)
• “… provide locations for manufacturing, processing, and other heavy
industrial uses which may require extensive transportation, water and/or
sewerage facilities, or open space because of the number of employees, the
type of manufacturing operation, or any by-products which might result from
the use.”8
It is clear from reading these purpose statements that the defining characteristic
separating these three zoning districts is land use intensity. The HI and IR zoning
districts allow for light industrial uses of more moderate intensity that are less likely to
have difficulty finding compatibility with adjacent land uses. Uses in the IG district
place extensive demands on water and sewer facilities as well as the transportation
system, and can produce by-products that all point to the need for discretion in where
such businesses are located. Because of the overlap in principal permitted uses between
the HI and IR zoning districts, there are limited differences in the intensity of what land
uses can occur in each district. If the applicant was attempting to rezone the property
from HI to IR, there would be little to argue about a change in intensity that might result
from such a decision. If the goal is to seek or allow for a tenant who might engage in low
to moderate intensity manufacturing or assembly in the zoning designation; as it appears
from the wording in the justification statement and in keeping with the predominant
character of Hopewell Valley, then those uses and much more are already available under
the current HI zoning.
The applicant has requested to rezone the property from HI to IG, however, a zoning
district which allows for the most intensive land uses outside of the Industrial Mineral
floating zone. That intensity is glossed over by the applicant in comparing the IG and IR
zoning districts. Coal yards, the manufacture of brick and the processing of chemicals
are just a few of the principal permitted uses in the IG district. In deciding whether a
proposed rezoning would be compatible with the existing neighborhood, it is
imperative to consider all uses permitted within that zoning district, particularly
principle permitted uses, as once the zoning is designated, there is only so much that the
site planning process can do to mitigate the effects of incompatible adjacent land uses.
Thus, while the Hopewell Valley may have avoided such incompatibility issues so far
in what businesses have located there, past history cannot always predict what will
happen in the future. As noted previously, rezoning the property to IG creates the
potential to locate heavy industrial uses in close proximity to the I-81 interchange, a
decision which may disrupt the careful efforts of past long range planning to avoid such
7 Washington County Zoning Ordinance Article 13, p.118. 8 Washington County Zoning Ordinance Article 14, p.124.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 15
15
issues of incompatibility by maintaining separation between the IG and HI zoning blocks
in northern and southern Hopewell Valley. The separation of incompatible land uses
from one another by arranging them spatially in a manner that prevents nuisances or
unintended externalities from negatively affecting adjacent properties is a hallmark of the
Euclidean Zoning utilized in Washington County.
C. Additional Considerations: Traffic and Road Improvements
As noted on page 5, traffic in the vicinity of the Halfway/Hopewell intersection
appears to be stable or declining. It is worth considering, however, what effect the
impending connection of Halfway Blvd and Greencastle Pike will have on the character
of the neighborhood, including the parcel subject to this rezoning. This improvement is
described in the CIP as providing an alternate access route to MD 63 and I-70 for heavy
truck traffic traveling to or from the industrial park on Halfway Boulevard Extended.
It certainly seems likely that even more traffic, particularly trucks, will be traveling in
the vicinity of the intersection in order to take advantage of this new alternate route to
and from Hopewell Valley businesses. At least in the short term, this road extension
could provide congestion relief to vehicles traveling in the vicinity of the
Halfway/Hopewell intersection. In the long term however; depending on where the
primary point of access for a fully developed Parcel 527 was located, it’s possible that
traffic generated from a more intensive operation at the site could contribute to lessening
the congestion relief benefits provided by the current extension of Halfway Blvd.
III. Recommendation:
The applicant has claimed that the local legislative body made a mistake in applying
the current zoning classification at the time of the Comprehensive Rezoning of the Urban
Growth Area in 2012.
The burden of the applicant in a “Mistake” case is to provide evidence that the Body:
1) Failed to take into account projects or trends probable of fruition,
2. Made decisions based on erroneous information,
3. Used facts that later prove to be incorrect,
4. Couldn’t have foreseen Events that have occurred since the current zoning, or
5. Ignored facts in evidence at the time of zoning application.
The applicant has not offered conclusive evidence that material facts were not
considered by the local legislative body during 2012 UGA Comprehensive Rezoning.
The existing character of the Hopewell Valley area is the logical outcome of long term
land use planning that has intentionally maintained a clear line of separation between the
more industrial northern Hopewell Valley and the more commercially oriented southern
Hopewell Valley for more than 20 years. Thus, the primary assertions of the applicant in
support of a mistake in the current zoning such as “the existing, predominantly industrial
nature of Hopewell Valley,” the “foreseeable future trend of industrial use
intensification” are not uniformly accurate throughout the Hopewell Valley Economic
Development Area.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-006 WASHCO Arnett Farms LLC
Page 16
16
Parcel 527, and all immediately surrounding parcels to the south, east and west, have
been zoned either HI or HI-1 for more than 20 years. The site characteristics noted by the
applicant, aside from the parcel’s immediate access to the CSX rail line, such as its
proximity to the I-81 interchange and minimal separation from the IG zoning districts to
the north, aren’t uniquely persuasive in demonstrating that the legislative body erred in
failing to alter a twenty-plus year history of commercial zoning and rezone the property
industrial.
Land use intensity should be strongly considered by the Body in evaluating the
applicants petition to rezone the property. Rezoning the property from HI to IG is of a
magnitude greater in terms of allowable land uses than rezoning from HI to IR would be.
Overall, given the mixed commercial and industrial character that pervades the
entirety the Hopewell Valley area, a low to moderate intensity industrial land use would
not be a substantial departure for the “neighborhood” in the vicinity of this property.
This type of land use is already permitted with the current HI zoning. In arriving at a
decision, the local legislative body should strongly consider the clear intent of past
decision makers to maintain a firm line separating intensive industrial operations from the
immediate vicinity of the I-81 and I-70 interchanges due to their potential impacts on
optimal function of adjacent lands and the transportation system.
Respectfully Submitted,
Travis Allen
Comprehensive Planner
i
Washington County
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING LAND PRESERVATION FOREST CONSERVATION GIS
April 13, 2018
Property Owner(s)
Applicant(s)
Location
Election District
Comprehensive Plan
Designation
Tax Map
Parcel(s)
Acreage
Existing Zoning
Requested Zoning
Date of Public Meeting
RECOMMENDATION
RZ-18-001
APPLICATION FOR MAP AMENDMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Hagerstown -Washington County Industrial Foundation (CHIEF)
Thomas, Bennett & Hunter, Inc.
1/10 mile NE of intersection of Halfway Rd & Hopewell Blvd
#24 — Cedar Lawn
Industrial Flex
48
572
19.37 acres
HI — Highway Interchange
IG — Industrial, General
March 5, 2018
The Washington County Planning Commission took action at its regular meeting held on Monday, April 2,
2018 to recommend approval of Map Amendment RZ-18-001 to the Board of County Commissioners.
The Commission considered the application, the supporting documentation submitted with the
application, the applicant's presentation during the public rezoning meeting and the Staff Report and
Analysis. This recommendation is based on acceptance of the applicant's claim that there was a mistake
made during the 2012 comprehensive zoning because of the existing predominant industrial nature of
Hopewell Valley and the reasonably foreseeable future trend of industrial use intensification was not
sufficiently taken into consideration when the HI zone was assigned. The Planning Commission also cited
the existing uses on adjacent parcels, the land use designation delineated in the Comprehensive Plan of
Industrial Flex, an active rail line located adjacent to this property and the close proximity to the interstate
to support the recommendation.
Copies of the application packet, Staff Report and Analysis, approved minutes of the March 5, 2018
public rezoning meeting and the unapproved minutes of the April 2, 2018 regular meeting are attached.
Respectfully b , ed,
Stephen T. Goodrich, Director
Washington County Department of
Planning & Zoning
STG/TA/dse
Attachments
cc: Kirk Downey
Jason Divelbiss
100 West Washington Street, Suite 2600 1 Hagerstown, MD 21740 1 240.313.2430 240.313.2431 ,, 7-1-1
VVWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
Eckard, Debra S.
From: Goodrich, Stephen
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2018 8:11 AM
To: Eckard, Debra S.
Subject: FW: Washington County rezoning
Attachments: 2-16 Washington County Planning-Zoning.pdf
Please acknowledge with our standard letter
Stephen T. Goodrich, Director
Washington County, MD
Department of Planning and Zoning
100 West Washington Street, Suite 2600
Hagerstown, MD 21740
sgoodric@washco-md.net
240-313-2430 (department)
240-313-2438 (direct)
240-313-2431 (fax)
From: Michael Alderman[maiIto: ilia l_derman(@Iibertyproperty.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 12:11 PM
To: Goodrich, Stephen
Subject: FW: Washington County rezoning
Mr. Goodrich, thank you for providing notice to us. We are a neighboring property owner. We support the proposed
rezoning of the subject property. Thank you, Michael Alderman
Michael Alderman
VP, Market Officer Pennsylvania
Liberty Property Trust
M 717.421.5980 D 610.997.6672
74 W. Broad St., Suite 240, Bethlehem, PA 18018
maiderman@libertyproperty.com
DISCLAIMER
This e-mail message is intended only for the personal use of the above
named recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you may not
review, copy or forward this e-mail message. If you have received this
communication incorrectly, please notify Liberty Property Trust
immediately via e-mail or phone and delete the message accordingly.
Washington County
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING I LAND PRESERVATION I FOREST CONSERVATION I GIS
February 23, 2018
Mr. Michael Alderman
VP, Market Officer Pennsylvania
Liberty Property Trust
74 West Broad Street
Suite 240
Bethlehem, PA 18018
RE: Rezoning Case RZ-18-001
Dear Mr. Alderman:
This letter acknowledges receipt of your recent correspondence regarding the proposed
map amendment for RZ-18-001 — Thomas, Bennett & Hunter.
Your correspondence will be made a part of the record for this case and will be entered
into the file and considered by the Washington County Planning Commission and the Board of
County Commissioners in their deliberations concerning the proposed amendment.
Sincerely,
Stephen T. Goodrich, Director
Washington County Department of Planning
& Zoning
STG/dse
100 West Washington Street, Suite 2600 � Hagerstown, MD 21740 240.313.2430 1 f': 240.313.2431 ; TO,: 7-1-1
VVWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
a
VICINITY MAP
TOWN
P-LW % Litt
!� MALL RD
PB H IR
C �
SCALE: 1" = 2000'
Surveyor's Certification
I hereby certify to the best of my professional knowledge and belief that the plan shown
hereon is correct; that it is part of the lands as conveyed by John W. Brown and Mildred
L. Brown to Hagerstown -Washington County Industrial Foundation Inc by deed dated
February 3, 1999 Liber 1474 Folio 173 and of the lands conveyed by The Bowman
Group, LLP. to Hagerstown Washington County Industrial Foundation Inc. by deed
dated January 23, 1998, Liber 1385 Folio 149 and of the lands conveyed by Mildred M.
Powell to Washington County Industrial Foundation Inc by deed dated December 21,
1995, Liber 1246 Folio 805, all deeds being recorded in the Land Records of
Washington County, Maryland; that this document was prepared by myself and that the
survey work reflected hereon is in compliance with the requirements set forth in
COMAR 09.13.06.12 in effect at the time this survey was performed.
I also certify that I am a duly licensed Professional Land surveyor under the laws of the
State/of MD. License No. 10731 y,Expiration on January 16, 2020.
Professional Survey6r Date
CURVE
I RADIUS
ARC LENG7H
I CHORD LENGTH
I CHORD BEARING
DELTA ANGLE
Ct
1 1175,94'
164.63
164.50
N 617757 E
8U117
C2
1 5619.58
1 461.60
1 461.47
1 N 60.35 36 W
4 42 23
100
N
HAGERST014M WASHINGTON CO IND, FOUNDATION INC `
u8ER 1246 FOOD 805 \ �,
/ PUR)NA MILLS S\
USER 1247 FOLIO 413 � 457.43 \
/ COMMERCIAi-
goo
C S X. MINERALS
_ OBER 757 FOLIO 8%
FOREST
12�8'39u
5
goo
SITE
1i 19.37Ac. \
N fjr
20D4 HALFWAY `\ ,
BOULEVARD L C
Llr?ER 4441 FOLIO 39 1,
AGRICULTUr?E/FQREST
EX. 30' R/W
FROM C/L
EX. MACADAM DRIVE , J�
FOREST CONSERVATION
ACCESS EASEMENT �\`• \�/�
Qj
G
l
FOREST CONSERVATION
O EASEMENT-13 QV
3.85 Ac.
o
FOREST CONSERVATION EASEMENT PER PLAT FOLIO 10632
TAX MAP 48-11-865&572 DISTRICT 27
F R E D E R I C K
DRAWING NUMBER 1 OF 1
SEIBERT &
GRAPHIC SCALE
ASSOCIA DES, INC. 02018
`D
DRAWN BY.
LEJ
DATE.
1.9.18
CIVIL ENGINEERS ■ SURVEYORS ■ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ■ LAND PLANNERS
128 SOUTH POTOMAC STREET, HAGERSTOWN, MARYLAND 21740
20 WEST BAI fIMORE STREET, GREENCASTLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17225
101 NORTH HANOVER STREET, CARLISLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17013
(301)r51-356U (717)597-1007 (717)871-8111 (301)416-7478 FAX (301)739-495e
so 100 zoo aoo
Ct
CXEL"'ICB'D BY:
DATE. •
( IN FEET)
1 inch = 100 ft.
SCALE..
—
1" 100'
i
i�
i
REZONING EXHIBIT
for
Thomas Bennett Rq-tnter Inc.
Situate along the South side of Hopewell Road
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Proposed Establishment and Modification to Certain Landfill User Fees for FY2019
PRESENTATION DATE: Tuesday, May 22, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Dave Mason, Deputy Director, Department of Solid Waste; Sara Greaves,
Chief Financial Officer
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt the proposed landfill user fees for FY 2019.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: On April 24, 2018, the Commissioners held a public hearing and heard public
testimony, if any, on the proposed establishment and modification of certain landfill user fees for for
FY 2019.
DISCUSSION: The proposed fee schedule as presented is requested as one facet of the overall
proposal to help address the projected FY 2019 Solid Waste Department Operational Budget shortfall.
The proposed rates more closely reflect the current and projected cost of landfill and recycling
operations, and are also in line with landfill user rates at other facilities in our local region.
FISCAL IMPACT: Based on the proposed fee schedule, revenue will increase by $439,920.
CONCURRENCES: Not applicable.
ALTERNATIVES: Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution adopting the proposed changes to the landfill user fees for FY 2019.
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: Not applicable.
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
1
RESOLUTION NO. RS-2018-___
RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION AND
MODIFICATION OF RULES AND REGULATIONS, LANDFILL AND
CONVENIENCE BOX FEES AND CHARGES
RECITALS
The Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland (the “Board”), in
accordance with Md. Code, Local Government Article, § 13-403, (“§ 13-403”) as amended from
time to time, owns and operates a county landfill and convenience boxes for refuse and garbage
disposal purposes.
In accordance with § 13-403, on June 22, 1995, the Board enacted an ordinance entitled
“Ordinance to Provide for Solid Waste Collection Licensing in Washington County, Maryland”
(the “Ordinance”), effective July 1, 1995.
The Ordinance and § 13-403 both provide for the adoption by the Board of rules and
regulations and landfill and convenience box fees and charges.
The staff of the Washington County Department of Solid Waste has recommended that
certain charges be established or modified.
A public hearing was held on Tuesday, April 24, 2018, following due notice and
advertisement of the landfill user fees that were proposed to be established or modified.
Any public comment received was reviewed and carefully considered.
The Board has determined to continue the following rules and regulations and adopt the
following landfill and convenience box fees and charges to become effective July 1, 2018.
The Board expressly finds that adoption of the following rules and regulations, landfill
and convenience box fees and charges would be in the best interests of the citizens of the
County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Washington County, Maryland, that:
2
1. All previous resolutions adopted by the Board, relating to the adoption of rules
and regulations, landfill and convenience box fees and charges, and to charge interest for late
payment of fees by landfill and convenience box users, are hereby repealed.
2. Washington County Trash. Only trash originating in Washington County will
be accepted at the landfill or greenboxes. All vehicles must have proper stickers and have paid
the requisite fees for authorization to dispose of trash in the landfill or greenboxes, and all
vehicles must be covered or loads secured.
3. Acts Not Allowed. The following acts are not allowed at the Washington
County landfill facilities or at the greenboxes:
(a) dumping trash collected from areas outside Washington County,
Maryland;
(b) salvaging, scavenging, or animal feeding in the landfill facilities or at the
greenbox facilities;
(c) speeding or reckless driving;
(d) dumping before or after scheduled operating hours; or
(e) operating unsafe vehicles, or vehicles not meeting the weight limitations
prescribed by the laws of the State of Maryland.
4. The following items will NOT be accepted at Washington County landfill
facilities or at the greenboxes:
(a) out-of-county trash
(b) liquids
(c) hazardous wastes as defined by the State of Maryland and the
United States Government
(d) septic tank sludge
(e) dead animals
(f) firearms
(g) radioactive materials
(h) wet paint
(i) rolled wire
(j) tree stumps (over 4 ft. in diameter)
(k) hot ashes
(l) pesticides
3
(m) toxic waste
(n) explosives
(o) chemicals
(p) vehicle bodies
(q) gas, kerosene, and oil – except for automotive oil and anti-freeze
which is collected in special collection tanks
(r) closed containers or closed drums
(s) paint sludge from industry unless tested and approved by the
Maryland Department of the Environment and Washington County
(t) no concrete or rocks larger than 4’ x 4’ x 4’
(u) batteries which will be accepted only at approved recycling areas
5. Asbestos will be accepted at the Forty West Landfill upon 72 hours prior notice.
Paint will be accepted if it is dry or solidified, and rolled wire must be compressed before it will
be accepted. No paint sludge from industry will be accepted without the TCLP toxic test
having been performed.
6. The green box facilities at Greensburg Road near Smithsburg, Kaetzel Road near
Rohrersville, Dargan, Hancock, and the Forty West Landfill may only be used by cars and
pickup trucks for disposal of waste from residences. No non-residential waste will be allowed
in the greenbox facilities.
7. Only county residents and county businesses, including county municipalities
may deposit solid waste in the County landfill. Only county residents may deposit solid waste
in the greenbox facilities.
8. VIOLATIONS.
(a) Anyone found violating any of the above rules and regulations of the
Washington County Landfill and greenboxes, including anyone failing to pay fees or penalties
when due, shall have their right to use the said landfill and greenboxes suspended for an
indefinite period of time or for such time as determined by the Deputy Director of the Division
of Environmental Management - Solid Waste Department.
(b) Anyone who wishes to appeal the decision of the Deputy Director of the
Division of Environmental Management Solid Waste Department relating to their use of the
landfill and the greenboxes shall have thirty (30) days from the decision of the Deputy Director
of the Division of Environmental Management - Solid Waste Department to appeal to the
Director of the Division of Environmental Management, or any designee.
4
(c) The Director of the Division of Environmental Management, or any designee,
shall conduct an informal hearing on the appeal in a timely manner and issue a written decision
affirming, reversing or modifying the decision of the Deputy Director of the Division of
Environmental Management - Solid Waste Department. The decision shall be made and issued
within thirty (30) days of the hearing.
(d) A person aggrieved by the decision of the Director of the Division of
Environmental Management, or any designee, may appeal the decision to the Board, within ten
(10) days from the date of the decision of the Director, or any designee. The Board shall conduct
a hearing on any such appeal as soon as practical thereafter and issue a decision in writing on
such appeal within thirty (30) days after the hearing thereof.
(e) A person aggrieved by the decision of the Board may appeal the decision to
the Circuit Court for Washington County, Maryland, pursuant to the Maryland Rules of
Procedure within thirty (30) days of the date the decision was issued. Unless stayed by a court
of competent jurisdiction, the decision of the Deputy Director of the Division of Environmental
Management - Solid Waste Department to suspend or revoke a license issued hereunder
continues in effect until reversed or modified.
9. For accounts more than thirty (30) days in arrears following billing, interest will
be charged at the rate of one and one-half percent (1.5%) per month on the unpaid balance.
10. The following landfill and convenience box fees and charges are as follows:
5
WASHINGTON COUNTY SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT
LANDFILL AND CONVENIENCE BOX
FEE SCHEDULE
(Effective July 1, 2018)
INBOUND MATERIAL:
Minimum scale charge $15.00 (320 lbs)
General Refuse/Municipal Solid Waste
Large haulers (with contract) – 1,000 tons or more
annually
Large haulers (with contract) – 10,000 tons or
more annually
$55.00/ton
$45.00/ton
$40.00/ton
Rubble, Building Debris $75.00/ton
Yard Debris (grass, leaves, brush) $63.00/ton
Auto and Light Truck (less than 22") (1-5 tires) $5.00 each
(6 or more tires) $250.00/ton
Equipment and Agriculture Tires $350.00/ton
Domestic Sludge $60.00/ton
Industrial Sludge $60.00/ton
High Volume/Low Weight $120.00/ton
Asbestos $130/ton
$25 minimum charge
Dirt (Clean Fill) $20.00/ton
Recycling $52.00/ton
Mattresses $10.00/each
Animal Carcasses $200.00/ton
OUTBOUND MATERIAL:
Minimum scale charge $10.00
Fill Dirt $4.00/ton
Mulch $30.00/ton
Soil Amendment (compost) $20.00/ton
OTHER FEES:
Appliances that used refrigeration $5.00/unit
Management/Inspection Fee $50.00/load asbestos
Solid Waste Collection License Fee $100.00/fiscal year (>5 employees)
$10.00/ fiscal year (<5 employees)
6
PERMIT FEES FOR RESIDENTIAL DROP-OFF:
Regular Residential Permit (Permits purchased between
January 1 and May 1 will be half price (i.e. $70.00))
$140.00/annual
Regular Residential Permit (with permit for unlimited
disposal of yard debris)
$160.00/annual
Senior Citizens (Age 62 & over) and Disabled American
Veterans (Under Age 62)
(Permits purchased between January 1 and May 1 will be
$70.00)
$95.00/annual
Senior Citizens (Age 62 & over) and Disabled American
Veterans (Under Age 62) (with permit for unlimited
disposal of yard debris)
$110.00/annual
Second Permit – Same Residence $70.00/annual
Yard Debris Permit (stand-alone permit) $50.00/annual
Recycling Permit $36.00/annual
11. Landfill and convenience box fees and charges shall be scheduled for review
within twelve (12) months of the date of this Resolution.
Adopted this ____ day of ____________, 2018.
Effective the 1st day of July, 2018.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
_____________________________ BY: ______________________________________
Vicki C. Lumm, Clerk Terry L. Baker, President
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency: Mail to:
Office of the County Attorney
______________________________ 100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
John M. Martirano Hagerstown, MD 21740
County Attorney
\\WASHCO-MD.NET\COUNTYATTORNEY\DOCUMENTS\SOLID WASTE\LANDFILL RULES, REGS. & USER FEES\RES\RESOLUTION - 2018.DOCX
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Proposed modification of Water and Sewer Rates for FY2019
PRESENTATION DATE: Tuesday, May 22, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Daniel DiVito, Deputy Director of Operations, Division of Environmental
Management; Sara Greaves, Chief Financial Officer
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt the proposed water and sewer rate schedule for
FY2019.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: On April 24, 2018, the Commissioners held a public hearing and heard public
testimony, if any, on the modification of water and sewer rates for FY2019.
DISCUSSION: Water and Sewer revenue requirements show that an increase in water and sewer
revenue is necessary to facilitate the Department of Water Quality’s long-range financial plans. The
presented rate schedule for FY 2019 is based on this requirement.
FISCAL IMPACT:
CONCURRENCES:
ALTERNATIVES:
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution adopting the proposed water and sewer rate schedule for FY2019.
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS:
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
RESOLUTION NO. RS-2018-___
Modification of Water and Sewer Rates
Department of Water Quality
(FY 2019)
RECITALS
In accordance with Section 6-308 of the Code of the Public Local Laws of Washington
County, Maryland, the Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
(the “Board”), may, following a public hearing, establish or modify a fee, rate, charge, levy,
or assessment for the treatment, collection or distribution of water or sewage.
The staff of the Washington County Department of Water Quality has recommended
that certain charges be modified.
A public hearing was held on April 24, 2018, following due notice by advertisement
of the Board’s intention to modify these charges.
Any public comment received was reviewed and carefully considered.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND, that the utility rates shall
be as set forth in the attached Schedule of Utility Rates for FY 2019, and other fees and
charges shall be as set forth in the attached Schedule of Fees for FY 2019; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND, that all previous resolutions adopted by the Board
relating to utility rates and other fees and charges, are here by repealed.
Adopted this _____ day of _________________, 2018.
Effective the 1st day of July, 2018.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
____________________________ BY:_____________________________________
Vicki C. Lumm, Clerk Terry L. Baker, President
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency: Mail to: Office of the County Attorney
________________________ 100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
John M. Martirano Hagerstown, MD 21740
County Attorney
1
WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF WATER QUALITY
SCHEDULE OF UTILITY RATES FOR FY 2019
(effective July 1, 2018)
Quarterly Sewer Rates Quarterly Water Rates
FULL SERVICE
Base for 6,000 Gal Per Account
Residential Full Service 122.20 104.76
Commercial I Full Service 125.00 104.76
Commercial II Full Service 127.59 129.40
Commercial III Full Service 127.59 n/a
Volunteer Service 123.05 104.78
Residential/Commercial Collection Service – per EDU 56.30 n/a
Volume per 1,000 gal
Residential Full Service 7.08 11.78
Commercial I Full Service 7.88 12.05
Commercial II Full Service 8.96 9.30
Commercial III Full Service 6.15 n/a
Volunteer Service 7.04 11.82
Residential/Commercial Collection Service – per EDU n/a n/a
Non-Metered Accounts 164.68 175.44
SEWER WHOLESALE
Per 1,000 gallons 7.27 n/a
2
WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF WATER QUALITY
SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR FY 2019
(effective July 1, 2018)
MISCELLANEOUS FEES
Deduct Meter Fee $25.00 per quarter
Infrastructure Management Program Fee $400.00 per Sewer EDU or required regional infrastructure contribution
equivalent to a minimum of $1,000 per EDU
Infrastructure Development Plan Fee $1,000 per Sewer EDU or required regional infrastructure contribution
equivalent to a minimum of $1,000 per EDU
Cedar Springs Infrastructure Development Fee
$1,000 per acre or per Sewer EDU, whichever is greater
(i.e. If the total acreage of the parcel applying for service exceeds edu usage
calculations, then a $1,000 per acre fee will be assessed. If this per acre fee is
initially assessed and at some point in the future the annual commercial
evaluation of edu usage exceeds the total acreage originally assessed, the fee may
be collected at that time based on acreage/edu differential. Inversely, if the total
calculations of edu usage initially exceeds total acreage of the parcel, then a
$1,000 per edu fee will be assessed and the fee may be collected as edu usage
increases.)
DELINQUENT ACCOUNT BILLING FEES
Maintenance fee for delinquent account (assessed when
account is not paid within the 10-day period following the late
notice)
$30.00
Service Turn-Off $50.00
Service Turn-On $50.00
Service Turn-Off (non-business hours) $75.00
Service Turn-On (non-business hours) $75.00
Fees apply to all water and sewer accounts
3
WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF WATER QUALITY
SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR FY 2019
(effective July 1, 2018)
ALLOCATION FEES
Joint Sewer Service Fee (Service areas jointly served by the City of
Hagerstown Water & Sewer Department and the Wash. Co. Dept. of
Water Quality)
$2,500
Allocation Fee for Sewer Service $6,900
Allocation Fee for Water Service $2,500
Meter Fee for Water $325
SLUDGE PROCESSING FEES*
Sludge less than 4% solids $0.06 per gallon with a minimum charge for 1,000 gallons
Sludge between 4% to 7% solids $0.06 per gallon with a minimum charge for 1,000 gallons, plus actual
landfill disposal tipping fee
Sludge greater than 7% solids Unable to accept.
*Other conditions, as determined by the County, may apply.
PRETREATMENT PROGRAM PERMIT FEES
Permit Application Fees:
SIUs $300.00
Non-SIUs $150.00
Permit Maintenance Fees: (These fees are based upon industrial
process wastewater flow and are collected on an annual basis.)
< 1,000 gpd
1,000 - 9,999 gpd
10,000 - 25,000 gpd
> 25,000 gpd
$250.00
$500.00
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
4
WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF WATER QUALITY
SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR FY 2019
(effective July 1, 2018)
ADMINISTRATIVE FEES
Design Review Fees:
Drawings -
One/two lot simplified subdivision plat $25.00
Multiple lot (more than two) subdivision development
plan or preliminary $25.00 - (per drawing)
Multiple lot subdivision combined Preliminary/Final $100.00 - (per drawing)
Multiple lot subdivision - final plat(s) $25.00 - (per set of drawings)
Architectural/Technical $150.00 - (per drawing)
Specification Water -
Water distribution $100.00 (per set)
Water Supply, Treatment or Storage $150.00 (per set)
Booster pump station $150.00
Specification Sewer -
Sewer Collection - Gravity all types $100.00 (per set)
Sewer Collection - Pressure $150.00 (per set)
Sewage Pump Station $150.00 (per set)
Sewage Treatment Plant (all sizes) $200.00 (per set)
Permits -
Filing of and tracking of each NPDES, MDE and SHA
Permits
$25.00
5
WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF WATER QUALITY
SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR FY 2019
(effective July 1, 2018)
LABORATORY ANALYSIS FEES
Price Per Sample
(Prices shown in this fee schedule are for normal sample preparation. If
additional treatment is required, additional charges may be imposed.)
SAMPLE COLLECTION $25.00
INORGANICS:
ACIDITY $15.00
ACID/ALKALINITY $25.00
ALKALINITY $17.00
AMMONIA NITROGEN $16.00
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (BOD) $25.00
CALCIUM $14.00
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD) $35.00
CHLORINE (FREE OR TOTAL) $8.00
CHLORIDE $22.00
*COLOR $5.00
S. CONDUCTANCE $11.00
T. CO2 $15.00
T. CO2 & BI-CARBONATE (BY NOMOGRAPH) $18.00
*CYANIDE $8.00
DISSOLVED OXYGEN $8.00
FLUORIDE $12.00
HARDNESS $13.00
*HEXAVALENT-CHROMIUM $8.00
*PHENOL $10.00
*FLASHPOINT $10.00
NITRATE $16.00
NITRATE+NITRITE $16.00
*ODOR $5.00
6
WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF WATER QUALITY
SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR FY 2019
(effective July 1, 2018)
OIL & GREASE $25.00
ORTHO PHOSPHORUS $16.00
PH (CORROSIVITY) $6.00
SETTLEABLE SOLID $10.00
SULFATE $24.00
SULFIDE $24.00
SULFITE $24.00
*SURFACTANTS $15.00
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS (TDS) $20.00
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN $22.00
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS $22.00
TOTAL SOLIDS $15.00
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS (TSS) $12.00
TOTAL TOXICITY (MICROTOX) $50.00
TURBIDITY $8.00
VOLATILES SOLIDS (INCLUDING TS) $20.00
POT ASH (POTASSIUM & CALCULATION) $ 30.00
TOTAL N (TKN+NO3+NO2) $ 38.00
METAL ANALYSIS BY FLAME AA (PPM)/GRAPHITE
FURNACE AA (PPB):
ALUMINUM $12.00
*ANTIMONY $12.00/$24.00
ARSENIC (GFAA) $12.00/$24.00
BARIUM (FLAA/GFAA) $12.00/$24.00
CADMIUM (FLAA/GFAA) $12.00/$24.00
CHROMIUM (FLAA/GFAA) $12.00/$24.00
COPPER (FLAA/GFAA) $12.00
7
WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF WATER QUALITY
SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR FY 2019
(effective July 1, 2018)
IRON (FLAA) $12.00
LEAD (FLAA/GFAA) $12.00/$24.00
MANGANESE (FLAA/GFAA) $12.00/$24.00
MAGNESIUM (FLAA) $12.00/$24.00
MERCURY (COLD VAPOR) $24.00
MOLYBDENUM $12.00
NICKEL (FLAA/GFAA) $12.00/$24.00
POTASSIUM (FLAA) $12.00/$24.00
SELENIUM (GFAA) $12.00/$24.00
SILICON (FLAA/GFAA) $12.00/$24.00
SILVER (FLAA/GFAA) $12.00/$24.00
*TIN $12.00
*TITANIUM $12.00
*VANADIUM $12.00
ZINC (FLAA/GFAA) $12.00
*TCLP, METALS $50.00
SAMPLE PREP. DISSOLVED METALS $10.00
SAMPLE PREP. FOR METAL DIGESTION $25.00
MICROBIOLOGY:
TOTAL COLIFORM/E. COLI - PRESENT/ABSENT $25.00
TOTAL COLIFORM/E. COLI COLILERT COUNT $25.00
TOTAL COLIFORM (MPN) $25.00
E. COLI/FECAL COLIFORM (MPN, EC, MUG) $25.00
SAMPLE DILUTION $10.00
ORGANIC ANALYSIS:
*FORMALDEHYDE $100.00
8
WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF WATER QUALITY
SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR FY 2019
(effective July 1, 2018)
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON $30.00
*TCLP, HERBICIDES $100.00
*TCLP, PESTICIDES $80.00
*TCLP, SEMIVOLATILES $100.00
*TCLP, VOC'S $40.00
*VOLATILE ORGANICS (EPA 524 or EPA 624) $40.00
TTO's (full scan: VOC, Semi Volatiles, Dioxin screen, Pesticides
and Herbicides) $645.00
*DIOXIN $300.00
*CHLOROFORM $80.00
*PAINT FILTER TEST $13.00
*SEMI-VOLATILES (EPA 625 & EPA 525) $100.00
*ACID/BASE NEUTRALS (EPA 8270) $450.00
*PESTICIDES & PCB's (EPA 608) $80.00
*HERBICIDES $100.00
*BTEX $40.00
*MTBE $40.00
*TPH $20.00
*GROSS BETA + GROSS ALPHA $80.00
*IGNITABILITY TEST ON SOLID $20.00
*Subcontracted test - price may change, as contracted.
\\washco-md.net\CountyAttorney\Documents\Water Quality\Water Quality rate hearings\RES\Resolution FY2019.docx
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: FY2019 Operating and Capital Budget Adoption
PRESENTATION DATE: May 22, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Sara Greaves, Chief Financial Officer, Kim Edlund, Director of Budget
& Finance
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt the FY2019 Operating and Capital Budgets.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: On May 15, 2018, the Commissioners held a public hearing and heard
public testimony, if any, on the proposed FY2019 Operating and Capital budgets.
DISCUSSION: The Fiscal Year 2019 Budget process has been a collaborative effort where the
Office of Budget & Finance worked alongside departments, the administration, and the BOCC.
We have brought forth a budget that was prepared in line with sound financial management and
provides for both existing services and new initiatives. The Fiscal Year 2019 proposed budgets
provide services to our citizens, maintain low debt levels, provide increased funding for
education and public safety, and meet infrastructure needs. The 2019 proposed budget was
balanced with no increase in the property tax and income tax rates.
FISCAL IMPACT: The FY2019 operating and capital budgets, which include all funds
amount to $328,752,270. The General Fund Budget is $229,639,310 and the Capital
Improvement Budget is $43,958,000 for Fiscal Year 2019.
CONCURRENCES: Not applicable
ALTERNATIVES: Not applicable
ATTACHMENTS: Not applicable
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: Not applicable
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form