Loading...
CPPC 07-14-03 Meeting AgendaTO: FROM: RE: DATE: File Copy COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development MEMORANDUM Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee Abbe S. Kennedy, Senior Planner 4 . - July Meeting and Agenda July 7, 2003 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 The Frederick County Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) will be meeting on Monday, July 14, 2003, at 7:30 p.m. in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. The CPPS will discuss the following agenda items: AGENDA 1) Continuation of discussion concerning a request to amend the Northeast Land Use Plan to relocate a major collector road planned in the vicinity of the intersection of Route 11 and Rest Church Road. This request has been submitted by G.W. Clifford and Associates to facilitate preparation of an industrial development proposal for approximately 104 acres located in the Stonewall Magisterial District. 2) Request to expand the Urban Development Area (UDA) to include six parcels comprising approximately 320 acres. This request has been submitted by the owners of the subject properties. The parcels are currently zoned RA (Rural Areas) and are located east of Route 37 and west of the City of Winchester in the Shawnee Magisterial District. 3) Introduction to the Rural Areas Study. 4) Other Please contact our department if you are unable to attend this meeting. Thank you. Access to the County Administration Building for night meetings that do not occur in the Board room will be limited to the back door of the four-story wing. I would encourage committee members to park in the county parking lot located behind the new addition or in the Joint Judicial Center parking lot and follow the sidewalk to the back door of the four-story wing. The door will be locked; therefore, please wait for staff to open the door. 107 North Kent Street a Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 • C • ITEM #1 CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION CONCERNING REQUEST TO AMEND THE NORTHEAST LAND USE PLAN TO RELOCATE PLANNED MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD During its June meeting, the CPPS reviewed a request for an amendment to the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) to facilitate relocation of a planned major collector road. After much discussion regarding traffic conditions in the vicinity of the intersection of Route 669 (Rest Church Road) and Route 11 North (Martinsburg Pike), the CPPS determined that direct input from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) was necessary prior to forwarding a recommendation to the Planning Commission concerning the request. It was requested that staff include this item on the committee's July agenda and arrange for a VDOT representative to participate in the discussion. Included with this agenda item are the same materials sent to you last month regarding this request. Specifically, a formal amendment request is attached that was submitted by Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E. of G.W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., dated May 20, 2003, on behalf of Mr. George Semples, owner of the land impacted by the planned major collector road. The Semples property is comprised of approximately 104 acres located near the intersection of Rest Church Road and Martinsburg Pike, which the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) designates for industrial land use. Preliminary materials have been circulated by the property owner outlining a proposal to rezone the parcel from RA (Rural Areas) to M1 (Light Industrial) and B2 (Business General), respectively. Initial discussions with County staff and VDOT representatives concerning the rezoning proposal revealed issues concerning the impacts of additional truck traffic on conditions at the intersection of Rest Church Road and Martinsburg Pike. In particular, the capacity of the Rest Church Road bridge to accommodate such traffic was identified as a concern, especially due to the short distance between the Interstate 81 northbound on/off ramps and the referenced intersection. As currently planned, truck traffic destined for industrial sites accessed by the major collector road would necessarily slow or stop at the intersection while proceeding across Martinsburg Pike. The co - mingling of such traffic with already substantial truck trips associated with nearby uses would compound existing capacity problems on the bridge and subsequently compromise the function of the Interstate 81 interchange. In response to this scenario, VDOT has recommended that truck traffic destined for industrial uses on the Semples site be enabled to continuously flow through the intersection via right turn movements onto Route 11. Such traffic would then turn left onto Route 669 (Woodbine Road) from which direct access to the Sempeles site would be achieved, again via left turn movements. Car traffic would be separated from truck traffic and access the site with through movement eastward. Mr. Maddox is requesting the CPPS to consider this alternate routing as a new location for the planned major collector road. Specifically, the amendment request suggests that Woodbine Road be identified as the planned major collector road. The major collector road currently shown bisecting the Sempelcs property would be deleted from the plan. (Please see attached letter of May 20, 2003 and plans from G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc.) Comprehensive Policy Plan As adopted, the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) shows industrial land use in the location of the proposed collector road change. The plan states that proposed industrial development will necessitate changes in existing roads, as well as require construction of new roads. The NELUP faillier states that general locations of new collector roads are located throughout the study area for efficient movement to occur, to enhance safety by limiting individual commercial entrances, and to preserve capacities on existing road systems to ensure adequate levels of service. The plan specifically states the following in respect to land use and transportation: Policies Germane to this Request: Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan "Industrial land uses are proposed adjacent to the Winchester and Western Railroad in the northern portion of the NELUP study area. Proposed industrial land uses should be developed within master planned areas which discourage individual lot access on the Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North) corridor. Proposed industrial land uses are to be developed with public water and sewer service. Furthermore, proposed industrial and commercial land use development should only occur if impacted road systems function at a Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. The installation of public water and sewer infrastructure, the development of new road systems and new signalization, and improvements to existing road systems will be the responsibility of private property owners and developers, unless the Board of Supervisors determine that public private partnerships are appropriate". (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.2) Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan - Infrastructure Components - Transportation "Proposed industrial and commercial development within land use plan boundary will necessitate improvements to existing road systems and the construction of new road systems. The land use plan provides for the general location of new collector roads and signalized intersections to channel vehicular traffic between key intersections throughout the study area. These collector roads are intended to promote efficient traffic movement between land uses , enhance safety by limiting individual commercial entrances and turning movements at random points, and preserve capacities on existing road systems to ensure adequate levels of service. The general location of new collector roads and new signalized intersections is depicted on the land use plan map." "Improvements to existing primary and secondary road systems will be required throughout the study area. To ensure that these road improvements occur, proposed developments should be expected to provide dedicated right of ways and construct all improvements deemed necessary by VDOT. Improvements to the existing primary and secondary road systems include improving Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North) to a four -land facility, and improving width and geometrics of Rest Church Road (Route 669); Woodbine Road (Route 669); Bransons Spring Road (Route 668); Woodside Road (Route 671); Brucetown Road (Route 672); Stephenson Road (Route 554); and Old Charles Town Road (Route 761)." (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.2) A recommendation to the Planning Commission regarding this request is appropriate. Land Use A collector road is also shown running north from Route 659 across Route 7 onto the Winchester Mall property and then continuing north through the Regency Lakes property, and also connecting to Route 661. There have been discussions concerning the possible alteration of the Eastern Road Plan in this area. One proposal being considered would create a collector road that runs from Greenwood road roughly across from the Greenwood Volunteer Fire Company in a northwesterly direction, through the Abrams Point development and connecting up with Route 658 (Brookland Lane). The road would then connect with the proposed connection running from Valley Mill Road across Route 7 to the Winchester Mall site. At the time of this writing, no decision has been made to incorporate this proposal into the Eastern Road Plan. Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan Route 11 North Corridor Plan In 1995, the Board of Supervisors and the Economic Development Commission identified a shortage of available industrial sites with rail access, a vital element in recruiting potential industries. As a result, the county initiated a search for potential locations for such uses. Numerous areas were identified within the northeastern portion of the County along the Route 11 North corridor that could be attractive sites for industrial development with rail access. As a result, the Board of Supervisors directed the County's Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) to develop a land use plan for the Route 1 I North corridor from Interstate 81 Exit 317 to Exit 321. In 1996, a land use plan for the Route 11 North corridor from Interstate 81 Exit 317 to Exit 321 was adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Approximately 3,200 acres of land was included within the adopted study area boundary of the Route 11 North corridor which extended from Interstate 81 to the west and the Hot Run, Hiatt Run, and Redbud Run drainage basins to the east. Portions of the Stephenson Rural Community Center and the Clearbrook Rural Community Center were included within the study area boundary. The Route 11 North Land Use Plan recommended industrial and commercial development as the predominant land use within the study area boundary. New large- scale residential development was not proposed as a component of the land use plan. Finally, a Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) designation was established to preserve and protect existing residential land uses, historic features, and significant open space areas. The DSA was recommended along the Route 11 North corridor, the Milburn Road corridor, and along the western segment of the Old Charles Town Road corridor. Frederick County 6-33 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Recent Issues Development activity and land use speculation has occurred along the Route 11 corridor between Interstate 81, Exit 321 and Exit 323 since the adoption of the north of the Route 11 North Land Use Plan. Concerns expressed by county officials and citizens regarding various land use activities and plans in this area led the Board of Supervisors to direct the CPPS to revisit the previously adopted land use plan. The Board of Supervisors directed the CPPS to develop a land use plan which expanded upon the Route 11 North plan to incorporate all land east of Interstate 81 between Interstate 81 mile marker 316 and Interstate 81 Exit 323 to the Opequon Creek, as well as land on the west side of Interstate 81 at Exit 321 and Exit 323. Land Use Plan Obiectives The CPPS conducted two visioning meetings in January 2000 at the Stonewall Elementary School. These meetings provided an opportunity for the CPPS to determine issues of importance to the community and to familiarize participants with the process necessary to undertake a large -area land use study and develop a land use plan for the designated area. Participants were encouraged to vote on identified issues and to submit comments associated with a prepared questionnaire. The CPPS utilized this information to establish objectives for the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan. Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan Objectives Policies ► Develop policies which provide for a balance of growth and preservation. ► Develop policies which prohibit higher density growth within defined portions of the study area. ► Ensure that public water and sewer service with adequate capacity accompanies future development proposals. ► Ensure that adequate Levels of Service for all road systems are maintained or are achieved as a result of future development proposals. ► Apply appropriate quality design standards for future development within the study area. Frederick County 6-34 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Land Use ► Concentrate industrial uses near major road and railroad transportation systems. ► Encourage industrial uses to locate within master planned areas. ► Provide for interstate business development opportunities on the eastern and western sides of Interstate 81 interchanges. ► Concentrate business uses at strategic locations along the Route 11 North corridor. ► Discourage random business and industrial land uses along Route 11 that are incompatible with adjacent existing land uses. Transportation ► Identify appropriate locations for signalized intersections to maintain or improve Levels of Service. ► Encourage central access points to industrial areas, minimizing new driveways and intersections with Route 11 North, Route 761, Route 664, Route 669, and Route 671. D Encourage the expansion of Route 11 to a four -lane roadway. ► Determine appropriate locations for new connector roads within industrial and commercial areas to minimize traffic impacts on Route 11 North and existing secondary roads. Discourage new access points along the historic Nlilburn Road corridor (Route 662). Infrastructure ► Identify appropriate locations within the study area for inclusion in the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). ► Determine impacts of proposed future land uses on the Opequon Waste Water Treatment Plant. ► Determine appropriate types of water and sewer systems to serve existing and proposed land uses. Historical ► Ensure that recommendations of Third Winchester Battlefield Preservation Plan are implemented to the extent possible. ► Determine appropriate methods to protect significant historic areas and corridors that are identified by the Battlefield Network Plan. Frederick County 6-35 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Identify appropriate locations to implement Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) land use designations to protect potentially significant historic resources as identified by the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey. Ensure that the Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) reviews all development proposals which iri,pact identified DSA. Environmental Identify environmentally sensitive areas such as flood plains and steep slopes to ensure that future land use impacts to these areas are minimized or avoided. Identify areas for agricultural and open space preservation. Encourage land preservation programs such as conservation easements, agricultural and forestal districts, and public purchase of permanent easements. Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan The Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan is intended to expand upon, and supersede the Route 1 I North Land Use Plan which was adopted in 1996. The study area boundaries have been significantly expanded to incorporate approximately 14,500 acres of land between Interstate 81, the West Virginia state line, the Opequon Creek, and the northern study area boundary limits of the Route 7 East Corridor Plan. The revised study area boundary accounts for the entire acreage which comprised the Route 1 I North Land Use Plan. The Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan has been designed to provide for a balance of land uses which includes industrial and commercial growth along the major road and railroad corridors, and the preservation of rural areas and significant historic features within the study area boundaries. Future land uses within the study area boundary should be sensitive to existing and planned land uses. The land use plan has been designed to provide the opportunity to develop industrial and business uses in a well-planned, coordinated manner. Industrial land uses are proposed adjacent to the Winchester and Western Railroad in the southern and northern portions of the study area, and adjacent to the CSX Railroad in the southern portion of the study area and within the Stephenson Rural Community Center between Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and the Global Chemstone Quarry. Proposed industrial land uses should be developed within master planned areas which discourage individual lot access on the Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North) corridor. Industrial land uses should be adequately screened from adjoining land uses to mitigate visual and noise impacts. Furthermore, industrial land uses should be planned to provide greater setbacks and buffers and screening along Martinsburg Pike to enhance the appearance of the corridor. Frederick County 6-36 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Business and commercial land uses are proposed along the Martinsburg Pike corridor, on the east and west side of Interstate 81 Exits 317, 321, and 323, and within the southeastern portion of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) near Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and Milburn Road (Route 662). It is envisioned that commercial land uses which cater to the interstate traveler will be developed along the three Interstate 81 interchange areas, while retail, service, and office land uses will occur along the Martinsburg Pike corridor and the southeastern portion of the SWSA. The development of business and commercial land uses is encouraged at designated signalized road intersections. All business and commercial uses are encouraged to provide inter -parcel connectors to enhance accessibility between uses and reduce disruptions to primary and secondary road systems. Additionally, business and commercial land uses which adjoin existing residential uses and significant historic resources should be adequately screened to mitigate impacts. The preservation and protection of significant historic resources, environmentally sensitive areas, and open space areas is encouraged by this land use plan. The majority of the acreage within the study area which comprises these features has been protected from industrial and commercial development through its exclusion from the SWSA expansion. This acreage includes the core area of the Opequon Battlefield (3Td Battle of Winchester); significant historic properties including Sulfer Spring Spa (34- 110), Cleridge (34-111), and Hackwood (34-134); the majority of the steep slope and mature woodland areas; and all of the flood plain and wetland areas associated with Opequon Creek. Significant historic resources including the core area of Stephenson Depot (2' battle of Winchester), Kenilworth (34-113), the Branson House (34-137), Milb i (34=729); the Byers House (34-1124), and the Milburn Road corridor (Route 662), and minor areas of steep slope and mature woodlands fall within the expanded SWSA boundary. The land use plan incorporates a Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) designation to enure that these features, as well as existing residential clusters and public land uses are protected from future industrial and commercial development proposals. The DSA is a community and historical preservation area; therefore, adjacent uses which are incompatible should provide adequate buffers and screening. The DSA is intended to discourage any development along the Milburn Road corridor and to promote a higher standard of development along the Martinsburg Pike corridor where residential clusters and public land uses dominate. Development regulations should be reviewed to ensure that they protect and promote a cohesive community environment within the study area with special attention to the DSA, while providing flexibility to encourage high quality development. The expansion of the Urban Development Area (UDA) is not proposed within the land use study boundary; therefore, higher density residential land use is not proposed. The land use plan recommends the allowance ofresidential land uses within the three Rural Community Centers (RCC). Residential land use should only occur in conjunction with public water and sewer service, and should be compatible with existing residential densities and lot sizes within each community center. Frederick County 6-36.1 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan Infrastructure Components The proposed industrial and commercial land uses identified in this land use plan are recommended to be developed with public water and sewer service unless they are of a scale that can be served by a conventional well and drain field system. Therefore, it is the recommendation of this land use plan to prohibit package treatment plants unless they are of a scale and design that is feasible for them to be dedicated to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority for operation and maintenance. Furthermore, proposed industrial and commercial land use development should only occur if impacted road systems function at a Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. The installation of public water and sewer infrastructure, the development of new road systems and new signalization, and improvements to existing road systems will be the responsibility of private property owners and developers, unless the Board of Supervisors determine that public private partnerships are appropriate. Transportation: Proposed industrial and commercial development within the land use plan boundary will necessitate improvements to existing road systems and the construction of new road systems. The land use plan provides for the general location of new collector roads and signalized intersections to channel vehicular traffic between key intersections throughout the study area. These collector roads are intended to promote efficient traffic movement between land uses, enhance safety by limiting individual commercial entrances and turning movements at random points, and preserve capacities on existing road systems to ensure adequate levels of service. The general location of new collector roads and new signalized intersections is depicted on the land use plan map. The development of these transportation improvements will be required as proposed industrial and commercial projects are realized. Improvements to existing primary and secondary road systems will be required throughout the study area. To ensure that these road improvements occur, proposed developments should be expected to provide dedicated right- of-ways and construct all improvements deemed necessary by the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Board of Supervisors. Improvements to the existing primary and secondary road systems include improving Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North) to a four -lane facility, and improving the width and geometries of Rest Church Road (Route 669); Woodbine Road (Route 669); Branson Spring Road (Route 668); Woodside Road (Route 671); Brucetown Road (Route 672); Stephenson Road (Route 664); and Old Charles Town Road (Route 761). Frederick County 6-36.2 Comprehensive Plan Land Use A corridor has been reserved along the proposed alignment of Route 37 - Alternative C; Phase IV. This corridor is flanked on either side by proposed industrial and commercial land uses. The proposed industrial and commercial land uses may provide an opportunity for the development of a future interchange along the phase of the Route 37 corridor. Water and Sewer: Proposed industrial and commercial development within the land use plan boundary will be developed in conjunction with public water and sewer infrastructure. Public water infrastructure exists within the study area along Martinsburg Pike from the southern study area boundary to the intersection with Interstate 81 Exit 321. This infrastructure extends to the east, following portions of Stephensons Road (Route 664); Old Charles Town Road (Route 664); and Gun Club Road (Route 666). Currently, no public sewer infrastructure exists within the study area boundary. Currently, the Opequon Waste Water Treatment Plant (OWWTP) is the closest treatment facility to the study area boundary. Utilization of the OWWTP would require the development of pump stations and lift stations throughout the study area. The proposed industrial and commercial land use acreages have been compiled to determine the potential impacts to the OWWTP capacities. The estimated development of these acreages demonstrates that capacities at the OWWTP will be exceeded prior to the buildout of these areas. The Board of Supervisors will need to work with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) to determine appropriate methods for establishing public water and sewer infrastructure with adequate capacities. Appropriate methods may include partnerships and agreements with adjoining localities to utilize existing infrastructure, the development of new treatment facilities for water extraction and sewer treatment, or public/private partnerships to develop necessary infrastructure. Frederick County 6-36.3 Comprehensive Plan gilbe r t w. Clifford & associates, ine INCORPORATED 1972 Engineers — Land Planners Water Quality 20 May 2003 Board of Victors; Mr. Eric Lawrence President: Frederick County Planning Thomas a O'Toole, P.E. 107 N. Kent Street Charles E. Maddor� Jr_, P.E. Winchester, Virginia 22601 Earl R_ Sutherland, P.E. Ronald A Mislowslcy, P.E. David I Saunders, P.E. RE: Northeast Land Use Plan Dtrecto,s: Rest Church Road Intersection wtniam L. write. Michael A Hammer Thomas W. Price Dear Eric, In the process of preparing a land use plan for the Sempeles property, we have been advised by VDOT of an implementation issue which may require the adjustment of the comprehensive plan. Attached is a plan showing the area under study. The issue involves the short distance between the Interstate 81 northbound lane off ramp/on ramp intersection and the U.S. Route I I intersection on Rest Church Road (Point A). The combination of the through and left turn movement of eastbound truck traffic on Rest Church Road may cause a conflict at the Interstate ramp due to the limited stacking length available at the U.S. Route 1 I/R.est Church stoplight. r VDOT has recommended that truck through movement be directed by aright turn south on Route I I to a left .urn on Woodbine Road (Rt. 669) at Point B. This will require Woodbine Road to be established as the major collector road in the comprehensive plan and the current major collector deleted from the plan. Track traffic would enter the Sempeles industrial site via an entrance at location C which may be adjusted from the location shown due to master plan or end user requirements. Cas traffic would continue to be allowed through movement eastbound at Point A_ Westbound car and truck traffic at Point A would be allowed normally. Attached is the VDOT comment, an update TIA describing this change and graphics which show how the northeast land use plan could be revised to address this concern. We request consideration of this change be included as a part of the update to the comprehensive plan. Sincerely yours, gllber t w. cli ord & associates, inc. C. ��.d o Jr:fP.E, Vice iaf-0 ent COVW Enclosure cc: Mr. Lloyd Ingram, VDOT, Edinburg Residency Mir. George Sempeles 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 667-2139 Fax (540) 665-0493 e-mail gwcarama) artWink.net MemberAmerican Consulting Engineers Council PROPOSED ZONING AREA B-2 ZONING M-1 ZONING 94.75 Ac TOTAL AREA 10J.75 Ac �r MA J 1 I , r /,' �? l�� /' �I l � dC.,rei' � / / �' I •— tip. J � i �/ Ittl I �IJ 41. rz . r xaned M,-, SaM„ Lxwd v -I SL�YPE LS PROPERTYgilbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. o GEfVERALIZED DEI/ELOPfi9ENT PLAN B7*ims Land Mmew wdw auzzy 117 E SL 1, *94a 201 fREX CK C0LW7Y, l9l GNA CM (540) 667-2139 FM (50) 665-WZ nWL: pww%rUft= 208 Church Street, S.E. Phone: 703.777.3616 Leesburg, Virginia Fax: 703.777.3725 20175 To: Sempeles Property File From: John Callow, PHR+A Date: May 9, 2003 Re: An Addendum to: A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Sempeles Property Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc (PHR+A) has prepared this document as an addendum to: A Tralfic Impact Analysis of the Sempeles ProE!ert_y, by PHR+A, dated December 16, 2002. Subsequent to the December 16, 2002 report, the Sempeles Property development plan has been modified to include truck access along Woodbine Road via Route 11. In -ail effort to address the corresponding traffic impacts, PHR+A has provided the following documents: 1) revised development -generated trip assignments, 2) revised 2012 build -out ADT (Average Daily Traffic) and AMIPM peak hour traffic volumes and 3) revised 2012 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service results. TRIP ASSIGNMENTS The trip distribution percentages for the revised Sempeles Property remain consistent with that of the December 16, 2002 traffic impact study. PHR+A has provided Figure 1 to show the revised development -generated AM/PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments along the study area roadway network. 2012 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS PHR+A has provided Figure 2 to show the revised 2012 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 3 shows the respective build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are attached to the back of this memorandum. Traffic volumes along Woodbine Road were interpolated from 2001 VDOT (Virginia Department of Transportation) traffic count data. CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the revised Sempeles Property development are acceptable and manageable. All study area intersections maintain levels of service `C' or better for 2012 build -out conditions. An Addendum to- A Trak Impact Anall sis of the Sempeles Propert>> May 9, 2003 Page 2 of 4 lr No Scale N 0 w � Rest C S **ram d� hurch Road * 8S(403) (24)39 `� z, 669 st Shur -ch Road Rest c hureh Road (792)3 12 �r / 11 r %,,ft 74(3 I S3 � 9S(4S3 ) M I7(&0) 4I) (340)460 17(.-0) SITE b o q 4I(I8S woo dbe Road y � h Figure 1 Development -Generated Trip Assignments An Addendum to: A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Sempeles Property May 9, 2003PtjR+A Page 3 of 4 ,I f` 1 W l An Addendum to:,4 Traffic Impact Analysis of the Senz eles PraperhP May 9, 2003 Page 4 of 4 No Scale U O�� RestChum e� C(C) Road (C)C 'ftcfto 2. Signalized t r Intersection o LOS = C(C) 669 Rest Churh mad PT4R+A Signalized \ Intersection fest LOS = C(C) C$�oh Riad � C(c) (0c, O `O 71 Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) SITE g U Unsignalized Intersection $(C) , woOdbze Road AM Peak hour (PM Peak Hour) * Denotes Critical Unsignalized Movement Figure 3 2012 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service EXISTING MAJOR COLLECTOR LOCAllimll SEMPELES PROPERTY RSNATION PLANPROPOSED TNPOA ti NORTHEAST LAND USE PLAN o PROPOSED ROAD PLAN fRE77 W1( COUNTY, WROOM gilbert w. clifford & ossociotes, inc. somm Lww rbwmg watw ouwlr 117 E. Faadiy SL Mladow, vg6a 22601 (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 6650493 EML gacarw" gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc INCORPORATED 1972 Engineers — Land Planners — Water Quality 2 July 2003 Ms. Abbe Kennedy Frederick County Planning 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Rest Church Road Intersection with Route 11 CPPS Meeting — July 2003 Dear Abbe, Board of Directors: President: Thomas J_ O'Toole, P.E. Vice Presidents: Charles F._ Maddox, Jr., P.E. Earl R. Sutherland, P.E. Ronald A. Mislowsky, P.E. David J. Saunders, P.E. Directors: William L. Wright Michael A. Hammer Thomas W. Price Attached is a response from VDOT which confirms their desire to look at directing inbound truck traffic from I-81 through a right turn to a left turn on Woodbine Road. The segment of Woodbine Road from U.S. Route 11 to the railroad crossing was upgraded to an industrial access standard years ago when Butler Manufacturing located on their present site. Inbound trucks to the Sempeles industrial site would turn left from Woodbine Road and return through the Rest Church Road intersection with Route 11. Woodbine Road would be designated as the major collector for rail crossing and further east. Future westbound traffic on Woodbine could use the internal access provided by Sempeles to return to I-81 with direct crossing at the Rest Church/Route 1 I intersection. We look forward to meeting with the CPPS next week. Sincerely yours, gilber>;� . clif rd & associates, inc. C. E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., Vice President CEM/kf Enclosure cc: Mr. Lloyd Ingram Mr. George Sempeles 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 667-2139 Fax (540) 665-0493 e-mail gwcaram(?�earthlink.net MemberAmerican Consulting Engineers Council Ron Mislows From: "Ingram, Lloyd" <Lloyd.Ing ram@VirginiaDOT.org> To: <gwcaram@earthlink.net> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 10:12 AM Subject: Sempeles Rezoning Addendum Attention: Mr. Charles E. Maddox, P.E., V.P The addendum you have submitted for review provides a significant improved flow of traffic and a reduction of congestion (projected LOS of "C" at all intersections) at the intersection of Route 669 and the north bound ramps of Interstate 81. This change, along with a partial signalization agreement at the Route 11 and Woodbine Road intersection will provide a pian that VDOT can support. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment on this addendum. Lloyd A. Ingram Transportation Engineer VDOT — Edinburg Residency Permit & Subdivision Section 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 (540) 984-5611 (540) 984-5607 (fax) Page 1 of 1 7/2/2003 ITEM #2 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN REQUEST FOR EXPANSION OF THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA (UDA) r ....., y.. a.�µ.X cm Included with this agenda item is a letter submitted by Mr. M. Willis White of Willow Grove, LC requesting expansion of the Urban Development Area (UDA) to include six parcels comprising approximately 320 acres currently zoned RA (Rural Areas). The subject parcels are not under common ownership; however, all of the property owners have consented to collective representation and are signatories of Mr. White's request. The area comprised by the parcels is located adjacent to and west of the City of Winchester, east of Route 37, and adjacent to and south of Route 621 (Merriman's Lane). The proposed expansion area is connected to Route 622 (Cedar Creek Grade) by the southernmost parcel included with the request. Attached is a map prepared by staff depicting the area of the expansion request, the boundaries of the existing UDA, and the current zoning of the subject parcels. The property owners contend that the subject parcels are better suited for the suburban development enabled by inclusion within the UDA as opposed to remaining in agricultural land use. The proposed expansion area is bounded by residential development to the east and north, respectively. The proposed expansion area is not subject to any of the small area land use plans included in the Comprehensive Policy Plan and is located wholly outside of both the UDA and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Three of the subject parcels adjoin a 183 -acre tract of the South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District. Moreover, a small portion of the site is identified as core battlefield area of the First Battle of Winchester, and portions of the site are shown within the respective study areas of the First and Second Battles of Winchester. (Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service) A recommendation to the Planning Commission regarding this request is appropriate. U: ICOMMITTEESICPPSIAgendasl2003 AgendasUuly 14, 2003 CPPS.wpd Willow Grove Farm 740,750,760 Mcrriman's Iane Winchester, VA 22601 May 12, 2003 Mr. Eric Lawrence Frederick County Planning Director Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Mr. Lawrence: The owners of Willow Grove LC, 740 LLC, 750 LLC, 227 Orchard Lane as well as Kenneth F. Marshall, owner of Pembroke Cove Properties LLC, request that their properties become incorporated in the Urban Development Area. These properties, currently zoned as agriculture, are surrounded now with subdivisions and residences: Merri'm n's Chase to the west, Morlyn Hills and Meadow Branch to the north, and Meadow Branch South and Orchard Hill to the east. We understand that there is a hearing process and that we must comply with presenting documents detailing our real estate holdings. Attached you will find the requested documents. We look forward to hearing from you in regard to this process and if there are hearings or meetings which we should attend. Copies: Lucy M W Barksdale Glenne White, Secretary WG LC Yours truly, Stephen D. White, Manager Willow Grove LC & 750 LLC M. Willis White, Manager Willow �Grovf LC C. Ridgel e, Jr., M r 740 C Alexander N. White, Owner 227 Orchard Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Kenneth F. Marshall Pembroke Cove Properties LLC 964 Cedar Creek Grade Winchester, VA 22601 jTu Mep 4: 53-A-90 Add— 750 Mertlmene L- o-— 750 LLC 4 Tax Mep e: 53 -A -92B 8 r Merrlmans Chase a� s� d7P� N55.59'49.q l9d 3 94 9� S 20'20'34•ly 1>89,63 A h 5 IT91'23• W 1134.34 Address: 964 Cedar Creek Grade Owner: Pembroke Cove Properties LLC Tax Map #: 53-A-91 N35'°jQ9. e S Koy.yo,os•e T27.a m y� Addr :964 Ceder Creek Gude f'6 Mep XC63RAe CweP pW SIT05'14•w 1037.92' b NJa. 3 / W r756o- me e Addree4: 760 Merrlmene Lane / ,y Owner. W Wow Orove LC / Tmr Mep /: 53-A-92 / RT. 37 N 11`17'38" E Request of Frederick County To Incorporate Following Parcels Into The Urban Area Development 53-A-91: Pembroke Cove Properties LLC 63-2A: Pembroke Cove Properties LLC 53-A-92: Willow Grove LC 53 -A -92A: Alexander & Michelle White 53 -A -92B: 750 LLC 53-A-90: 740 LLC Contact: Willis White, Glenne White Address: 720 S. Braddock St. Winchester Pnone:540-667-1710 s9CALE. 1" = 500' Add--. 227 —herd Len, Address: 760 Merrimans Lane Omer. Alder & M ,We V h , Tex Mep No 53 -A -92A Owner: Willow GroveLC Tax Map #: 53-A-92 S Koy.yo,os•e T27.a m y� Addr :964 Ceder Creek Gude f'6 Mep XC63RAe CweP pW SIT05'14•w 1037.92' b NJa. 3 / W r756o- me e Addree4: 760 Merrlmene Lane / ,y Owner. W Wow Orove LC / Tmr Mep /: 53-A-92 / RT. 37 N 11`17'38" E Request of Frederick County To Incorporate Following Parcels Into The Urban Area Development 53-A-91: Pembroke Cove Properties LLC 63-2A: Pembroke Cove Properties LLC 53-A-92: Willow Grove LC 53 -A -92A: Alexander & Michelle White 53 -A -92B: 750 LLC 53-A-90: 740 LLC Contact: Willis White, Glenne White Address: 720 S. Braddock St. Winchester Pnone:540-667-1710 s9CALE. 1" = 500' on, MERRIMANS MEADOW T] CHASE \�: BRANCH CIT 1MY OF CITY f + ° f ORLYN WINCHESTER g FHILLS 53 A 92B, `'D( • 53 A First Battle of Winchesterl /+ Core Area --- r ?, MEADOW BRANCH SOUTH has " 53 A 91 ` \ ORCHARD HILL ^' 63 A 2A • • • • 4 • • • LEGEND QCCey aor w�i ar Lkbm DweWwrml Araa B1 (ButMa, Wl�borhaod of h" B2 (Bualn.ed, GMMkal DI4Mct) B3 (9rtimst, InOnMal Traluetm Dlaltkt) J EM (auracM Mart d clu" Dukkt) 1 HE (Ktw Educalbn Dldrkt) 7 M7(IndudtYl, LISW Dbb" I (maudrK General Dhdrkt) i UHi (WbRo Mom. CoaamadyDlWd) MS (Medkal Suppun Dletrkt) RS (R.ddarel.l RacMkrrl Community District) >, RA (Rural Amer Cadd ) RP(Redd.rdlal Peer--. Diekkt) WamWel Demure rDhaim ChurchRahe. Church SWah Fradarkk FIRST WINCHESTER Map 19, Integrity — 1991 Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley NPS Study U S. 52 > IC ity of Winchester[. us. 50 E,. 81 Rt. 7 . 3 j Y Rt, 37 J.. q I Frede r ic k Co U 3 . 11 Study A.& 64..doy ........ C— Area 13;ou.ddy Rmd6 0 Slm-s -d RIemL IL County or City Ei..nd r I ale miles SECOND WINCHESTER Map 25, Integrity- 1991 Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley NPS Study .� Ohl I .. '�'.:..*� - "•n. 1f City of Winchester. C n;rf s Yrti ! �- T EF.=.`.. Retabod integrity Lost Integrity' Ex.' 79; Study Area Boundary �f t� Frederick Co. ;, a Cors Area Boundary { ! t f Ronda Streoms and Rirers ;-�""��� � %� �-��----_—' 0 County or City Boundary' CML WAR SITES IN THE SHENANDOAH VALLEY OF VIRGINIA SuNrntaxY The decision to protect battlefield land and the decision of how much of a battlefield to set aside, are choices that hinge upon the community's goals as well as the Nation's. Where the concern was simply to recall an event to memory, then small parcels were typically set aside for the erection of a monument or interpretive markers. This approach was pursued often in the past, even for national parks, based on the "implicit preserva- tion" of open land. In other words, an interpretive stop or trail was acquired and markers erected to describe the historical importance of what was expected to be rural landscape for the foreseeable future. Visitors to such sites often assumed that the landscape was somehow protected, when in actuality, the view was a free bonus. Returning years later, they are liable to be surprised and disturbed to see a housing subdivision or commercial strip where they expected to see a battlefield. In fact, residential developers have reversed the "free bonus" and can now charge top dollar for homes with a park in the back yard to serve the recreational needs of a limited number of residents. The assumptions underlying small parcel -commemoration have been undermined on all sides, and this condition will continue to generate crisis after crisis, as constituents recognize and respond with outrage to the loss of historic resources. The most dramatic example of public outrage in recent years was the crusade to prevent a shopping mall from being built adjacent to Manassas National Battlefield Park, resulting in a costly Federal acquisition. But this is only one incident of many. The famous Cornfield at Antietam was only recently protected from development by a private foundation. A mile -long, "commemorative" strip of the Wilderness was recently degraded to serve as the median strip of a four -lane access road leading to a resort community. A thousand homes and a shopping center are planned for parcels adjacent to Gettysburg National Military Park. With the increased pace of land use change, the small parcel approach simply does not protect the resources and land where historically impor- tant events took place, nor does it allow adequate public access to enable appreciation of nationally significant events. Whether the goals of battlefield preservation are to enable interpretation of the battlefield, in terms of understanding the terrain and military maneuvers, or, to 20 attract visitors who are interested in experiencing a past event, or, to provide the opportunity for the general public to view locations important to our national experience and history, or, to set aside ground, as President Lincoln stated, that was consecrated by the men who struggled there to give life to the nation, it is clear that small parcel - commemoration is inadequate and should be abandoned except as a last resort, when it is necessary to prevent the memory of an event and its participants from fading entirely. The commitment to protect large tracts of battlefield land, on the other hand, implies a larger desire in the community to preserve open land for a variety of reasons—not just for historical significance—but also to maintain the rural character of an area, to encourage agriculture, to set aside natural areas, to protect water- sheds, to provide recreational space, or to provide a historic attraction that is unique to the area. Until now the preservation of battlefields in the Shenandoah Valley has depended almost exclusively on the small parcel -commemorative approach, in many cases, consisting simply of interpretive highway pull -offs along the right-of-way. Several private groups—primarily the Virginia Military Institute, the Association for the Preservation of Civil War Sites, the Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation, and the Lee -Jackson Foundation—have acted to protect larger parcels through acquisition funded by public donations. Mostly, preservation has relied upon the free bonus of open farm and natural lands and the coincidence of interests between landowners and preser- vationists—as shown by the establishment of the Pied- mont agricultural preservation district and the preserva- tion intent of the Holy Cross Abbey at Cool Spring. The pace of growth and development in the Valley and the incremental loss of farmland are undermining these assumptions of "implicit preservation." Individuals, who have shouldered the burden of preservation with little help or recognition from Local, State, or Federal governments, cannot keep pace with the loss of resources. It remains then to determine approaches to battlefield protection that will preserve these historic resources and landscapes. The regional coordination of preservation and interpretation efforts, and a range of public and public-private partnerships, will be needed to address the unique needs and values of the individual sites. There is no blanket solution. In the sections that follow, we try to provide sufficient facts and analysis to inform the public policy choices that need to be made. C� • ITEM #3 INTRODUCTION TO THE RURAL AREAS STUDY At its meeting on March 12, 2003, the Board of Supervisors endorsed the Planning Department's annual work program, which identifies the completion of a rural areas study as the top priority of the long-range planning program. With the recent conclusion of the NELLTP study, staff is poised to undertake this project with the CPPS as its principal comprehensive planning activity for the next several months. As a prelude to the study's commencement, staffwill provide an introduction to the issues and trends characterizing rural land use in Frederick County. The intent of this overview is to ensure a shared appreciation for the context of this study amongst c C3nmittee members. This presentation will be followed by dialogue concerning study objectives, methodology, and time frame. The outcome of this discussion will enable staff to finalize arrangements and materials necessary to formally begin the study at the committee's August meeting. The scope of the rural areas study will be necessarily broad, a reflection of the increasingly complex issues and myriad policy areas impacting rural land use. Indeed, inherent to the study will be analysis of problems and opportunities involving resource management and conservation, transportation, economic development, and the intensity and design ofnew development. In essence, this study will result in a comprehensive vision for our rural areas, to include a "toolbox" of inter- related policies sufficient to realize and sustain the desired reality. To facilitate our dialogue concerning the study's framework, staff encourages each member of the CPPS to draw from their unique perspective and conceptualize an individual vision for the County's rural areas. Attempt to articulate those characteristics that define the identity of the rural areas of Frederick County, and outline which attributes are most critical to achieving and/or maintaining a distinctive rural character. Conversely, identify those conditions or influences that you perceive to have a compromising effect on the County's rural character. Should you have questions concerning this item, please contact Chris Mohn, Deputy Planning Director, via email at cmohn(a,co.frederick.ya.us or telephone at (540) 665-5651. U.•ICOMMITTEEYCPPR4gendas12003 Agendas Uuly 14 CPPS Item #3.wpd