Loading...
TC 01-06-92 Meeting AgendaCOUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation Committee FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Planner H RE: January Meeting and Agenda DATE: December 31, 1991 There will be a meeting of the Transportation Committee at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, January 6, 1992 in the Personnel Conference Room on the first floor of the Administration Building, 9 Court Square, Winchester, Virginia. This meeting will be open for public discussion of any agenda item. Please contact our department if you have any questions or are unable to attend. AGENDA 1) Request from Mr. John F. Eversole, Jr., to implement minor road improvements to Route 704, south of Gore. 2) Request from Mr. James W. Golladay, Jr., to rename Golladay Road to Sherando Road. 3) Discussion of the Virginia Department of Transportation's 'Blueprint for Transportation Policy". 4) Other. THE COURTHOUSE COMMONS 9 N. Loudoun Street - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601 1/6/92 Transportation Committee Agenda Page -2- 1) The first item in your agenda package regards a request from Mr. John F. Eversole, Jr., to have the Virginia Department of Transportation install minor safety measures along Route 704. Mr. Eversole understands that this particular road section is slated for improvements on the County's Six Year Secondary Plan; however, he and others along this road are concerned about the time frame involved. Enclosed is a letter from Mr. Eversole explaining the safety measures he believes are needed at this time. 2) The second item in your agenda package is a request from Mr. James W. Golladay, Jr., to rename Golladay Road to Sherando Road. Mr. Golladay believes that this will be easier for identification purposes in this part of the county. The current policy of Frederick County requires that all proposed road names be reviewed by the Graphics Technician. This is part of the Board of Supervisors policy to implement an Enhanced 911 system, and is required to insure that road names are not duplicated or phonetically similar. Enclosed is a page from the current road names in Frederick County for your information. 3) Enclosed is a copy of the survey requested by the Virginia Association of Counties. This survey was sent to all localities in the state as a result of the Virginia Department of Transportation's 'Blueprint for Transportation Policy". Also enclosed is a copy of the resolution drafted by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors opposing this policy. 4) Other. 26 November 1991 P.O. Box 118 Gore, VA 22637-0118 Mr. Evan Wyatt Planner II - Frederick County Planning Commission P.O. Box 601 9 N. LoudouMStreet Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Mr. Wyatt: This letter is submitted as.a follow-up to our recent telephone conversation concerning petitioned improvements to Route 704, south of Gore. As you know this road segment is included in the non-scheduled portion of the county six-year plan. Complete improvements to this road as petitioned for several years ago are obviously still several years in the future. During the interim period the signers of our original petition request completion of all minor improvements possible, i.e., guard rails, no dumping signs, speed limit signs, etc. There are several dangerous banks with little or no shoulder that need attention. In addition there are several hidden driveways, including two of mine, that should have appropriate warnings erected nearby. Thank you for your attention to our concerns. Sincerely OHN F. VERSOLE, JR. (HAND DELIVERED) December 4, 1991 Mr. Kris Tierney Deputy Director Department of Planning and Development 9 Court Square Winch-ster., Va. 22601 Dear Kris: At the next meeting of the Transportation Subcommittee please request that they rename Golladay Road to Sherando Road. I realize that this may create some hardship on the homeowners living along this section whose homes face on this road, but believe that it would be more in keeping with the overall transportation network which we have developed for this area of the County. It would also act as a reference for the new High School. Thank you, in advance, for your consideration to this matter. Sincerely, James W. Golladay Jr. Sheffield :.el^_ r lace WC Shelly Drive FC Forest Laky Estates 8;S SI Enancoah Avenue WC Forst Hills == Shenandoah .ah P ace WC � . Shenandoah Trail FC Shawneel and 43 Shwherds CnUr , C Albin Village .f 75 Sherandh Circle i `.. Village at i'lercl:'!C!�= !� S;l=ra('!c:= Lane FC BG-0 1Sherandr Lane F� (rural) - Sheridan Avenue WC Williamsburg 80 Sheridan Street SC Stephens Estates 74 Sherwood Lane FC � Sherwood S d !- F cares= t 827 Shickle Lane FC Sbickle 39-0i Shirley Street WC S' -•c y Circle -C Fairway Estate= 1217 Shy �ckeysvi l le Road FC -- 67i Short Street FC Arcad i s NIHP - Short Street. SC Surry Square 7� S.- ry _ick Avenue WC Siler Road FC -- 60 Silo Lane FC 61-03 Si lv=. ,-od Lane 0 Sinchass Lane, FC -- 851 Sing^ass , Road Road, FC -- E0 Sinking ,Spring Lane FC -- 853 Sir john's Road FC Sir J=hrAddition = �= Sl John's Road F C 667 Olt Bra SkyVi2w Lane FC 52-03 Slalom Curt FC Lake Holiday Est. C 17,18 � Sleepy Hollow Road FC S l ee pywood s Read FC Homesteads at S l eepywood s k 5 ( Sleigh Drive FC Lake Halide.;: Est. S 17,18 Slippery Elm Lane FC Frederick Woods 7C Smelter Lane FC 70-04 Smithfield Avenue FC Fort Collier Ind. Park 784 Smithfield Avenue WC Ft. Collier industrial Park 54 Smitty D.''?vc FC Chestnut Oak Estates a 19-02 y-0'- Sm: Sm sky Hollow Road FC Cr`en Acres 1. 1 C''' S Snake Drive FC Valley Estates 07-03 Snapp Pond Lane FC Longview Acres 73 Snyder Lane WC Soldiers Rest Lane FC E2_02. Somerset Drive XC Pembridge Heights- O -64-X Somerset Drive FC Village at Lakeside 75 Songbird Lane FC Apple Ridge/Phelps lots SL-oi Sorrel Lane FC Shenandoah •ah Po , r' _ .L S , t 77-�. South Buckton Road FC -- 842 South Drive FC Mountain Retreat South Hayfield Road FC -- 600 South Pifer Road FC -- 600 South Sleepy Creek Ro FC -- 735 South Street WC South Timber Ridge Ro FC -- Southdown Circle FC Albin Village 696 75 So ut hover k Street WC l (30) Locality: Frederick Countv Respondent: Evan A. Wyatt VACo TRANSPORTATION SURVEY Title_ Planner II Telephone: 7o3-669-5651 1. The fiscal years for which data are being requested are FY 88 FY91, and FY92_ This is not a typo. 2. For FY 88 and FY91 please provide actual expenditure information. For FY92 provide estimates. 3. For Hampton Roads localities, cost information for FY 88 has already been obtained from the Hampton Roads PDC. 4. Survey responses are due by November 15- L HISTORICAL DATA A. Construction - Urban Street System or Secondary System (Projects funded through 6 -year Planl Regular Road Construc 1987-88 1,343,446 ha twpA06, 2 70 jvfaqaved Road Share State Allocation 1,749,716 B. Local Only Construction Projects 1987-88 NA C. Street Maintenance Payments 1987-88 State Payment NA Actual Expenditures NA Difference NA 1990-91 1,509,448 71 2,029,819 1990-91 NA -� 1990-91 PE=� A NA D. Transit (Local Appropriation (Gen_ Fund or Cap. Budget) for transit assistance] 1991-92 1,195,036 354,478 1,549,514 1991-92 NA 1991-92 NA F= NA NA 1987-88 1990-91 1991-92 NA NA NA I U. IMPACT OF SECRETARY MILLIKEN'S PROPOSAL A. 1992-93 Urban or Secondary Allocation (estimated) 2,073,787 20% Local Match (S) 414.75 7.40 B. How would you describe the impact that a 20% match requirement would have on your general fund and/or capital budget? This would significantly impact the Frederick County General Fund by requiring the County to use money currently budgeted for school construction, as well as education in general. The 20% match requirement will create a significant hardship to Frederick County at a time when state revenues are declining. C. Should use of the street maintenance allocation be made more flexible? What changes would you like to see implemented? How beneficial would this be to your locality? NA - D. Would you consider switching your highway allocation to transit assistance? NA RESOLUTION OPPOSING "BLUEPRINT FOR TRANSPORTATION POLICY" SFAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation will be conducting public hearings on the Secretary of Transportation's "Blueprint for Transportation Policy"; and WHEREAS, said proposals will have dramatic negative fiscal implications on local government operating budgets; and WAS, said proposals which would allow certain .transportation functions to be performed by local government, such as traffic light installation, do not address transfer of liability or fiscal responsibility; and WHEREAS, increasing eligibility participation in the transportation revenue sharing program without significantly increasing the funding will only deplete the fund more rapidly; and WHEREAS, creating a separate rail division only increases the bureaucracy in Richmond, Virginia. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors opposes any Virginia Department of Transportation proposal that increases the Frederick County government's liability exposure and fiscal responsibility; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that these proposals be tabled until the Commonwealth of Virginia can identify the revenue sources to fund these new local government proposals. John R. Riley, Jr. County Administrator County of Frederick, Virginia