The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-17 CommentsCandice Perkins From: Funkhouser, Rhonda (VDOT) <Rhonda.Funkhouser@VDOT.Virginia.gov> on behalf of Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) <Matthew.Smith@vdot.virginia.gov> Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2017 9:37 AM To: John Bishop; 'mcheran@fcva.us Cc: Tim Stowe; Short, Terry (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT); Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) Subject: Carbaugh Rezoning - Tax Map 74-A-68,69 - VDOT Comments A VDOT review has been completed on the Carbaugh Rezoning. We offer the following comments: Following discussions with Frederick County, it is VDOT's understanding that if an agreeable proffer regarding the monetary participation for the completion of Renaissance Drive can be reached between Frederick County and the developer, the county will consider the transportation mitigation responsibilities of the subject property resolved. While VDOT agrees that the completion of Renaissance Drive is an important and significant transportation improvement to the area, there remains future concerns over the operation of US 11 and the interchange with Route 37 given the extent of planned developments in the region. Should the County determine a revised submission of the TIA is not warranted, the following comments are for the County's knowledge and understanding of potential operational issues related to the TIA's study limits along the US 11 corridor. 1. The primary mitigation proposed in the study to address transportation impacts of the development is monetary participation by the developer in the extension of Renaissance Drive to Shady Elm Road. While this transportation improvement is critical for the subject development, as well as other developments in the vicinity of Shady Elm Road and Apple Valley Road, the current trigger of said participation in both the draft proffers and study report conveys the risk of potential impacts to the existing transportation network in the event that the subject development proceeds prior to the completion of Renaissance Drive. The study states that access to the development will be from Shady Elm Road prior to the completion of Renaissance Drive and the conclusion section states that "the traffic that is forecasted from this development can be accommodated on the existing road network". However, this assumption is unfounded as the TIA does not include Build and Design Year scenarios where Renaissance Drive does not connect US 11 and Shady Elm Road. It is VDOT Staunton District Planning's recommendation that Frederick County consider requesting modifications to the proffers that requires the monetary participation of the developer and start of construction on the extension of Renaissance Drive, prior to the issuance of the initial occupancy permit on the subject property. Without such changes to the proffer, it is recommended that the TIA be revised to evaluate the build and design year impacts without Renaissance Drive in place and detail improvements needed to mitigate impacts. 2. The traffic models and analysis outputs presented in the study are currently inadequate in identifying the future operational performance of the US 11 corridor between Renaissance Drive and the Route 37 interchange. As a result, the potential impacts of the full build out of the subject property on US 11 are unclear. The following is a summary of deficiencies within the current traffic models: • In all models, the traffic signal at US 11 and the Route 37 eastbound ramps is coded with signal timings, vehicle extension, and clearance intervals that do not match VDOT supplied data (the signal timing sheet is included in Appendix F of the report). • In the existing year models at the US 11 and Route 37 eastbound ramp signal, the left turn movements for the off -ramp and Kernstown Commons Boulevard approach need to be revised to protective / permissive phasing with leading lefts. • The percentage of heavy vehicles within the models seems to be based on the number of heavy vehicles counted during the entire traffic data collection window instead of the peak hour window, and therefore may not represent accurate conditions. Additionally, it seems future year heavy vehicle percentages at the US 11 and Route 37 eastbound ramp intersection were not adjusted for development traffic. • No trips were assigned to the various side streets accessing US 11 between Renaissance Drive and Route 37 and as a result, there are considerable vehicle balancing discrepancies in the models. While these side streets were not scoped as study intersections, assumptions should have been made for these side street movements to achieve vehicle balancing in the network and provide a more accurate analysis of the operational performance of US 11. • The analysis does not consider trip diversion or potential impacts from existing developments along Shady Elm Road and Apple Valley Road to the US 11 corridor via routing along Renaissance Drive. 3. Even with the deficiencies listed above, based on the potential trip generation associated with the subject property and other potential developments within the vicinity, it is likely that additional improvements will be necessary within the study area to mitigate future impacts. These may include access management / alternative intersection consideration along US 11 between Renaissance Drive and Route 37 and a potential second lane on the Route 37 eastbound on-ramp to accommodate simultaneous receipt of heavy northbound left turns and southbound right turns from US 11. 4. In the Build and Design Year models, the US 11 and Route 37 eastbound ramp signal is modified from the current protected only left turn phasing on US 11 to protected / permissive phasing in the form of flashing yellow arrows. However, this left turn phasing modification is not discussed in the report from either a safety or operational perspective or listed as an improvement recommendation. If a modification from protected only to protected / permissive left turn phasing is being considered as a future year improvement, VDOT recommends that the protected only left turn phasing also be analyzed in the future year to identify operation impacts if left turn phasing must be converted back from protective / permissive should a safety concern arise. Additionally, VDOT intends to upgrade the Route 37 eastbound ramp and Kernstown Commons Boulevard left turn phasing to protective / permissive via flashing yellow arrows in the next few years. 5. When Frederick County's Revenue Sharing project advances for the extension of Renaissance Drive, improvements should be considered along the existing section of the roadway to improve future operations of the facility as developments begin to come online. Improvements to be considered include modifying the traffic signal at US 11 to provide flashing yellow arrow left turn phasing and the consolidation of the two eastern most entrances currently serving vacant properties in order to reduce potential turning movement conflicts and increase available storage of the eastbound left turn lane onto northbound US 11. 6. The study includes two trip generation scenarios for the subject property, consisting of ITE rates and custom rates with supporting documentation as proposed by the preparer of the study. This approach was agreed to during study scoping to evaluate the differences in transportation impacts between to two trip generation scenarios. Please be advised that the utilization of ITE rates will still be the accepted process for all studies moving forward per the Chapter 527 TIA Administrative Guidelines. Any use of custom trip rates, if requested, will be discussed on a case by case basis during the study scoping process. Should you have any questions or wish to discuss this information, do not hesitate to let me know. Matthew B. Smith, P.E. I Area Land Use Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation Clarke, Fredei ick, Shenandoah & Warren Counties 14031 Old Val'ey Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 voice: 540/934-5615 Date Received 7/19/2017 Frederick C'ounly Department of Fire and Rescue Office of the Fire I arshal 1080 Coversione Drive N rnchesrer, {'A 22602 (540) 665-6350 Fax: (540) 678-4739 Email: fino(wfeva. us Plan Review & �ornrnents Plan/Permit Type Rezoning Application 07-19-17 Name Henry J. Carbaugh Trust Address 831 Shady Elm RD Winchester Project Name Applicant Name & Number RE# Permit Number Emergency Vehicle Access: Hydrant Location: Siamese Location: Fire Lanes Required: Plan Approval Status Comments Rezoning Stowe Engineering 540-686-7373 Adequate Inadequate :A� Adequate Inadequate � Adequate Inadequate l�ffA Yes No Approve �- Signatur Reviewed By: Kenneth Scot Jr. Title: Date Reviewed 8/11/20117 VA 22602 Rezoning Comments Frederick County Fire Marshal Mail to: Frederick County Fire Marshal 1800 Coverstone Drive Winchester, Virginia 22602 (540)665-6350 r{L., Hand deliver to: Frederick County Fire & Rescue Dept. Attn: Fire Marshal .Public Safety Building 1800 Coverstone Drive Winchester, Virginia Applicant: Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the Frederick County' Fire Marshal with his review. Attach a copy of your application form, location map, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other pertinent information. Applicants Name: Timothy Stowe Mailing Address: Stowe Engineering, PLC 103 Heath Court, Winchester VA 22602 Telephone: 540-336-0656 Location of property: The property is located at 831 Shady Elm Road in the Back Creek Magisterial District. Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: M1 Acreage: 107.21 Fire Marshal's Comments: Fire Marshal's Signature & Date: 7_ Notice to Fire Marshal - Please Return This Form to the Applicant 22 4 FREDERICK. WATER 315 Tasker Road PH (540) 868-1061 Eric R. Lawrence Stephens City, Virginia 22655 Fax (540) 868-1429 Executive Director www.FrederickWater.com August 18, 2017 Tim Stowe Stowe Engineering, PLC 103 Heath Court Winchester, Virginia 22602 RE: Rezoning Application Comment Carbaugh Rezoning Application Tax Map Number: 74-A-68 and 74-A-69 107.21 acres Dear Mr. Stowe: Thank you for the opportunity to offer review comments on the Carbaugh rezoning application package, with an undated draft proffer statement and the Impact Statement dated October 21, 2016. Frederick Water offers comments limited to the anticipated impact/effect upon Frederick Water's public water and sanitary sewer system and the demands thereon. The project parcels were recently added to the sewer and water service area (SWSA) and in an area not presently served by FCSA. SWSA enables access to public water and sewer service by county policy. Location within the SWSA does not guarantee that sanitary sewer and water capacities are available to serve the property. The rezoning application is silent on the potential use, square footage, and water and sewer demands. The Impact Analysis suggests a 1,000,000 square foot user for calculating solid waste production, while the Traffic Impact Analysis proposes 46.9 acres of light manufacturing and 46.9 acres of warehousing uses. In order to analyze water and sewer usage, Frederick Water will analyze demands based on a light industrial user which consumes 500 gpd/a (gallons per day, per acre). Based on the 107 acre site, water and sewer demands are projected to each be 53,500 gpd. 51 ANNIVERSARY Water At Your Service Page 2 Carbaugh rezoning application Tim Stowe, Stowe Engineering August 18, 2017 Water and sanitary sewer treatment facilities are presently available to meet the projected demand of 53,500 gpd. Facilities for conveyance of water to, and sanitary sewer from, the subject properties does not presently exist. From previous discussions with the applicant, Frederick Water understands the applicant's intent is to construct a water line which will tap into an existing 20 -inch water main along Route 11, and traverse westward within to be established easements. Sanitary sewer would be addressed through the construction of a new sanitary sewer pump station located along the CSX railroad tracks, and a sanitary sewer force main northward following the CSX railroad tracks to a point at which the force main would discharge into the Hoge Run Interceptor. The interceptor would then convey flows to Parkins Mill Wastewater Treatment Plant. An optional sanitary sewer route would be the construction of the Opequon Interceptor which will facilitate flows directly from the subject properties to the Parkins Mill Wastewater Treatment Plant. Regardless of the route for water and sanitary sewer conveyance, the construction of the infrastructure will be the responsibility of the applicant. The proffer statement is silent on improvements that would be constructed by the applicant to meet water and sanitary sewer demands. Accordingly, the comments offered herein are general in nature. The ultimate decision regarding the ability to serve the property with adequate water and sanitary sewer will be determined at the time the site's use is determined, conveyance facilities are constructed, and water and sewer connection fees are paid to Frederick Water. Sanitary sewer system capacity is not reserved until the sewer connection fee is paid to Frederick Water, and physical connection to the system is made. Water and sanitary sewers are to be constructed in accordance with the FCSA standards specifications. Dedicated easements may be required and based on the layout vehicular access will need to be incorporated into the final design. Please be aware that the FCSA is offering these review comments without benefit of knowledge of the specific use of the site. Additionally, we would welcome an opportunity to review any proffers which may serve to mitigate any sanitary sewer deficiencies. Thank you for the opportunity to offer review comments. Sincerely, :r Eric R. Lawrence Executive Director Cc: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, County Planning Department Rezoning Comments Frederick Couniv Department of Public Works 1rlail tn: F'redctick L'c►trrrtt D,:pt ol'Public Works Attn- Dire:oor of Fnt inceri.ng 107 Nomh hent Street Winchester, Virainia 22601 ('540) 66�-^643 Iland deliver to: Vrederick Count}, Dept. of Public 1h ``irlts Elim; Director of h'neinceiin, I tP' North Koit Sircvi Applicant: Mease till otit the rnfi-ii-mi iron as q(,vzwa. 1y as possible• in order w assist the Department o Public W,)ik s%Idt thOr reivjc v. Al(ach a copy of your application form. location map, proffer statement, impact analysis*, and any other pertinent information. Applicant. Novie. 71motny 5tumt Telephone: K40-316-rri;56 M- Ailin , Address- ,trnva Pnryn+ Arinrt Prr. Location of llri? )eft ' he property !S �GCated at 831 5 lady 7 m Road it the, Rack Crmv. Magistelai District CUITent 7011ing= RA %ti�rlyt �, reclitc-lied- td1 Acrvagc. '0"21 Department of Public W'ork's Comments: )q cop,. py-chros-i7t,ve revietl ,v, , - Notice to Dept. of Pu bl c Works - Plensc Return This Form to the Applicant 'l ELORD FAIRFAX HEALTH DISTRICT July 18, 2017 Lord Fairfax :Health District Frederick / Winchester Environmental Health 107 North Kent Street - Suite # 201 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Tel. (540) 722-3480 Fax (540) 722-3479 www.vdh.virginia.gov Agency Comments: VIRGINIA V1 DE I DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Protecting You and Your Environment This Health Department has reviewed the request for comments for the Rezoning of property located at 831 Shady Elm Rd in the Back Creek Magisterial District Tax -Map #74-A-68 & 74-A-69. from RA to M1. Based upon information provided by applicant, this Health Department has no objections to the rezoning of the subject property. However, it is the recommendation of this Health Department that any known or discovered sewage disposal systems or private water wells on the property be properly abandoned, per Health Department Regulations or best practice policies In the event that it is determined that there are sewage disposal systems or private water wells on the property. please notify this Health Department immediately for proper abandonment procedures. Agency Signature: �-\ � - �� ,L Date: -7 g l 7 Title: �=-- V` a:%= " 3 "Qy- (NOTICE TO AGENCY—PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO THE APPLICANT) COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/665-6395 August 17, 2017 Mr. Tim Stowe, PE, LS Stowe Engineering, PLC 103 Heath Court Winchester, Virginia 22602 RE: Request for Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) Comments - Carbaugh Business Center Property Identification Numbers (PINS): 74-A-68 and 74-A-69 Zoning: RA (Rural Areas) District Dear Tim: The Frederick County Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) considered the above referenced Rezoning application during their meeting on August 15, 2017. The HRAB reviewed information from the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (VDHR), the Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley Maps and information provided by the Applicant. This site is identified by Property Identification Numbers 74-A-68 and 74-A-69, in the Back Creek Magisterial District. The Carbaugh rezoning seeks to rezone 107.21 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the M1 (Light Industrial) District with proffers. Historic Resources Advisory Board Comments: The Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley published by National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield on the site; however it is located within close proximity to the Kernstown Battlefield. The Virginia Department of Historic Resources identifies seven mapped properties within the immediate area of the subject property, one of which is located on site. After reviewing this information and the Applicant's materials and proposals, the Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) recommended approval of the Rezoning with the condition that the Applicant perform an intensive level survey on the historic structure located on-site (Henry Carbaugh House - #34-1040) prior to its demolition. Thank you for the chance to comment on this application. Please call if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, �- Candice E. Perkins, AICP, CZA Assistant Director CEP/pd 107 North Kent Sheet, Suite 202 e Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000