CPPC 11-08-04 Meeting MinutesNotes of CPPS Meeting November 8, 2004, 7:00 p.m.
Item 1
CPPA Amendment for UDA Extension — Solenberger/Bridgeforth Property
Senior planner Eddy introduced this proposal and presented the modified Western Jubal
Early Land Use Plan (WJELUP) dated November 1, 2004.
CPPS members discussed the modified Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan.
Concern was raised that staff had not incorporated the concept of a joint city/county
school in the new plan. Planner Eddy remarked that she understood this to be the
concern of only one member. Other CPPS members expressed a view that this joint
school should be included. Planner Eddy was directed to include a sentence in the text
encouraging discussion of a city/county school.
As regards public facilities, it was suggested that other joint facilities with the City might
be possible. Also, examples of public facilities, specifically fire and rescue, should be
mentioned in the text.
Mr. Evan Wyatt of Greenway Engineering, representing the applicants, agreed with the
subcommittee's recent decision to remove the school site from the map. He believed the
text would suffice, but preferred that the text concerning schools in the guiding
principles should be deleted.
Mr. Wyatt also expressed concern with the text of the WJELUP plan concerning
transportation. He did not agree that the interchange should be guaranteed before build
out. He stated that the developers did not have the ability to acquire land along Route 37.
He also stated that costs would be high and that a partnership would be better.
Mr. Jim Vickers (who owns the former Marshall Farm with Mr. Ritchie Wilkins) stated
the interchange at Route 37/tubal Early Drive would cost approximately $15 million. It
is a regional issue, not one generated by this development. Mr. Vickers estimated that
building Jubal Early Drive would cost $3 million, improving Cedar Creek Grade would
cost $500,000 and the new collector road would cost $600,000.
A discussion of road improvements followed. It was suggested that perhaps the full costs
of the transportation improvements should not be borne by the developers, although it
should be accomplished by build -out.
A member questioned whether the Route37/Jubal Early interchange was necessary given
the improvements planned for Cedar Creek Grade.
Mr. Wyatt explained that the Route37/Jubal Early interchange was included in the WATS
Plan. He commented that all local officials wanted the new interchange, but no one
wanted to pay for it. He suggested a partnership to pay for the new interchange.
The members considered whether the sentence on a public/private funding, previously
removed at the request of the members, be reinstated.
Mr. Vickers questioned whether the improvements to Cedar Creek Grade would even be
necessary if the new interchange was built at Route37/Jubal Early.
Mr. Wilkins spoke and stated that the density on the Marshall tract would be lower than 4
dwellings per acre.
Members continued to discuss transportation. One member wanted to leave the wording
in the November 1St version as written. Another member expressed concern with trading
off improvements. One member believed that the developers should not pay for the
entire new intersection and only wanted a plan to come forward with any rezoning as to
how it would be funded.
Members appeared to agree that the text on transportation be diluted such that a
"solution" to the interchange dilemma be included with any rezoning.
Action on this item was deferred until the next CPPS meeting. Staff was directed to
revise the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan (draft dated November 1, 2004) to rewrite
the text on the road improvements that would be the responsibility of the developers, to
add back in the sentence on public/private partnerships and to remove the text on schools
in the guiding principles paragraph.
Item 2
2005-2006 Capital Improvements Plan
Senior Planner Susan Eddy introduced this topic and reminded CPPS members that their
role in the C.I.P. process was to determine whether the proposals were in conformance
with the Comprehensive Policy Plan.
Planning Technician Patrick Sowers gave a presentation on the 2005-2006 C.I.P. He
summarized the 2005/2006 C.I.P. and highlighted changes from last year's C.I.P.
Mr. Jim Doran, Director of Parks & Recreation answered questions on his department's
submittals. A CPPS member questioned the need for a skate park. Mr. Doran viewed
skateboarding as along term activity, not just a fad.
A CPPS member questioned why land acquisition was not the highest priority. Another
member questioned why Parks & Rec was not getting land from developers.
Mr. Doran responded that aquatics were the highest priority
A discussion of the evolving bike plan followed.
A joint maintenance facility was suggested.
Three members of the public, (Steve White, Mary Longerbeam & Leah Wood), spoke in
favor of the aquatics project. They noted the difficulty county residents and students
have with getting pool time at the city's pool. The benefits to tourism of a county pool
were also noted.
Renny Manuel, Director of the Winchester Regional Airport, discussed the airport's
master plan and the modification to that master plan currently being prepared. She also
explained the financing of the airport. A CPPS member suggested more references to the
airport in the Comprehensive Plan.
Fred Hildebrand, Superintendent of the Clarke-Fauquier-Frederick-Winchester
Regional Adult Detention Center, spoke on the jail projects. He explained that the
Virginia Board of corrections did not meet until November 16`, and that the projects
might change. Mr. Hildebrand also responded to questions about the jail site and its buil-
out after these current project requests were completed. A sink hole on site could
possibly be filled in to provide additional land.
Mr. Al Omdorff, Assistant Superintendent for Administration, and Mr. Steve Kapocsi,
Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent, spoke on the county school requests. Mr.
Omdorff, explained that the department's late submittal was the result of the date of the
School Board retreat. He also explained that new items #7 and #8 included construction
as well as land acquisition. Mr. Orndorff explained the role and need of the
transportation facility.
Members questioned the need for different county departments to have transportation and
maintenance facilities.
Members discussed the need for planning department/school department coordination.
This already takes place. More information on schools could be contained in the
Comprehensive Plan.
Members unanimously agreed to forward the 2005-2006 CIP to the Planning
Commission as the projects were in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
Item 3
Rural Areas Study
Senior planner Susan Eddy reminded members of the upcoming meetings connected with
the Rural Areas Study.
Meeting ended at 9:30 p.m.