STYLE>
C
HARLES
C
OUNTY,
M
ARYLAND
ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES
MANUAL
PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES FOR



SCHOOLS



TRAFFIC
AND
GROUNDWATER SUPPLY

Adopted July 7, 1997 - Revised June 23, 2007

Prepared by: PLANNING DIVISION
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT
COMMISSIONERS OF CHARLES COUNTY, MARYLAND
Murray D. Levy, President
Marland Deen
Robert J. Fuller
James Jarboe
Wm. Daniel Mayer
Eugene T. Lauer, County Administrator
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT
Roy E. Hancock, Director of Planning and Growth Management
Steve Magoon, Planning Director
MISSION STATEMENT
The mission of the Charles County Government is to provide our citizens the highest quality
service possible in a timely, efficient and courteous manner. To achieve this goal government
must operate in an open and accessible atmosphere, be based on comprehensive long and
short term planning, and have an appropriate managerial organization
tempered by fiscal responsibility
VISION STATEMENT
Charles County is a place where ...
* Private initiative is rewarded and businesses grow and prosper, while the preservation of
our heritage is paramount,
* Government services have reached the highest level of excellence and
* The quality of life is felt by its citizens to be the vest in the region and its government
is recognized as a leader in support of these expectations.
CHARLES COUNTY GOVERNM ENT
PLANNING AND GROW TH MANAGEM ENT
POST OFFICE BOX 2150
LA PLATA, M ARYLAND 20646
SAY NO TO DRUGS
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COUNTY TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
Introduction
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1
When Required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2
Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2.0
Preliminary APF Analysis
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.0
Policy for Determining Adequacy of Existing Roads
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.2
Roadway Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.3
Trip Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4
Trip Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5
Intersection Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5.1 Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5.2 Signalized Intersections Level of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.6
Roadway Link Analysis: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
3.6.1 Multi-lane Highways: Level of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.6.2 Two Lane Highways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.7
Capital Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.8
Impact of approved Preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.0
Policy for Determining Adequacy of Schools
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
I.
Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
II.
Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
III.
Allocation of Available Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
IV.
Transition Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
V.
Transfers of Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
VI.
Time Limit on Allocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
VII.
Severability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
VIII. Administrative Procedures for the Allocation of School Capacity . . . . . . . 15
5.0
Policy for Determining Adequacy of Ground Water Supply
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.1
Public Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.2
Ground Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.3
Fire Suppression in the Rural Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.0
APFS Submittal
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.1
Adequacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.1.1 Roads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.1.2 Ground Water Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.1.3 All Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.2
Phasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7.0
Mitigation
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
8.0
Planning Commission Consideration
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
9.0
Adequate Public Facilities Manual
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Appendices
A.
Preliminary Analysis Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
B.
Definitions
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
C.
Adequate Public Facilities Flow Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
D.
High School Impact Fee District Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 1
APF Manual

July 7, 1997 - Revised June 23, 2007
1.0
INTRODUCTION
The Adequate Public Facilities element of the Charles County Zoning Ordinance is designed to accomplish
several things:
#
Assure that proposed development will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare.
#
Encourage new development to occur in areas of the County where public facilities are being
provided and which are designated in the Comprehensive Plan.
#
Require developers to provide new, additional, or upgrades of existing public facilities which are
necessary to address the impact on public facilities from their project, when the existing and
planned facilities will not provide or maintain an adequate level of service.
This element of the Zoning Ordinance provides a significant tool for implementation of the Comprehensive
Plan. Through the development and adoption process of both documents, the public identified the need
for having adequate facilities in place when development occurs as a major issue facing the community.
The ordinance addresses this need while also providing the opportunity for economic development to
continue in the County.
The ordinance provides exemptions for small projects or those that will have a minimal impact. It also
requires that an applicant only mitigate his or her impact on the facility and not the correction of previous
capacity problems. The correction of any existing problems are the responsibility of the various levels of
governmental agencies.
This manual is intended to provide clear guidance to the interpretation, administration, and application of
this element of the Charles County Zoning Ordinance. It specifies the standards, criteria, and procedures
that are to be followed by both the applicant and County staff in executing this provision of the ordinance.
1.1
WHEN REQUIRED
An Adequate Public Facilities Study (APFS) is required for any subdivision, site plan, or zoning permit
application with the following exceptions:
I.
Minor residential or commercial subdivisions; containing five lots or less. Commercial
site plans will be subject to the APF at the time of site plan submittal. Major commercial
subdivisions will be subject to APF at subdivision and reviewed at site plan.
ii.
Non-residential development containing less than 1200 square feet of floor area. If the site
plan involves a change in use, where the change doesn't involve adding more than 1200
square feet of floor area, and the new use has the same or a lesser trip generation rate than
the previous legal or non-conforming use, then no further study will be required for roads.
In all other cases the Preliminary APF Analysis shall be submitted.
1.2
PROCESS
The attached flow chart (Appendix C) indicates the general path of a submittal for APF review. The
majority of this process would run concurrent with the review of a subdivision or site plan submission. In
the case of a subdivision, the Planning Commission would consider both the preliminary subdivision plan 2
APF Manual

July 7, 1997 - Revised June 23, 2007
and the APFS concurrently. In the case of a site plan, the Planning Commission will consider the APFS
before site plan approval can be granted by the Zoning Officer.
2.0
PRELIMINARY APF ANALYSIS
Prior to submittal of an application which requires an APFS, a Preliminary APF Analysis (Appendix A)
must be filed by the applicant with the County. The Preliminary APF Analysis is described as a
"Preliminary Traffic Analysis" in the Zoning Ordinance. However, in practice it was found that it was
more efficient to identify information for all elements of the study as early as possible. Therefore, the
Preliminary APF Analysis considers roads, schools, an