PC 05-20-92 Meeting AgendaAGENDA
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The Old Frederick County Courthouse
Winchester, Virginia
May 20, 1992
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB
1) Meeting Minutes - April 15, 1992 ................................ A
2) Monthly and Bimonthly Reports ................................ B
3) Committee Reports ......................................... C
4) Citizen Comments .......................................... D
5) Site Plan application #005-92 of Winchester Airport Authority for the
extension of the safety zone. This property is located on Route 645
Airport Road, in the Shawnee District.
(Mr.Bise) .................................................E
6) Subdivision application #003-92 of Battlefield Partnership for two
roads - Marathon Drive and Sulky Drive. This property is located
on the east side of Route 11 South, across from the DMV, in the
Back Creek District.
(Mr. Tierney) ............................................... F
7) Master Development Plan #004-92 of Freeton for 18 townhouses. This
property is located on the west side and adjacent to Route 641, 0.2 miles
north of Route 277, in the Opequon District.
(Mr. Tierney) .............................................. G
Page -2-
PC Agenda
May 20, 1992
S) Subdivision application #004-92 of Freeton for 18 townhouses. This
property is located on the west side and adjacent to Route 641, 0.2 miles
north of Route 277, in the Opequon District.
(Mr. Tierney) .............................................. H
OTHER
9) Discussion regarding recommendations from the Transportation Committee
for the Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS).
(Ms. Stanley) ............................................... I
10) Discussion regarding proposed interchange on Route 37 for the Winchester
Medical Center.
(Mr. Tierney) ............................................... J
11) Other (no attachment) ....................................... K
MEETING MINUTES
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on
April 15, 1992
PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman; John
R. Marker, Vice Chairman/Back Creek District; Manuel C. DeHaven, Stonewall
District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; Ronald W. Carper, Gainesboro
District; George L. Romine, Shawnee District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back
Creek District; Todd D. Shenk, Gainesboro District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon
District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Beverly Sherwood, Board Liaison;
and David L. Schroeder, City Liaison.
Plannin,g Staff present were: Robert W. Watkins, Secretary; Kris C. Tierney,
Deputy Planning Director; and Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Golladay called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
BIMONTHLY REPORT
Chairman Golladay accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's
information.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Comprehensive Plan - 4113/92 Mtg.
Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the Comprehensive Pian Subcommittee considered
two requests for land to be included in the urban development area. The first request was from
residents of the area located north of 644 and west of 522. The area consists of approximately
700 acres and contains about 200 homes. These people have failing septic systems and wells and
have been working with the State Water Control Board to get water and sewer in their area.
Mrs. Copenhaver said that the Health Department will be conducting a survey of the area. She
said that the Subcommittee is trying to determine if the area can be designated as a service area,
but not place it in the urban development area.
The second request was from Glaize, Vickers, and Bowman to extend the urban development
area to include. approximately 204 acres north of the realigned Route 642 and bounded by Route
522 on the east and old Route 642 on the west and north sides.
Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee - 4/14/92 Mtg.
Mr. Thomas reported that the Subcommittee reviewed two requests to modify the
zoning ordinance. The first request was from the Donald B. Rice Tire Retreading Operation to
allow tire retreading in the M1 (Light Industrial) Zone. Mr. Thomas said that the consensus of
the Subcommittee was to allow the use with restrictions, however, they were very specific about
this particular type of use and its location in the MI Zone. The second request was to allow
human service centers in the M1 (Light Industrial) Zone and the Subcommittee recommended
approval on this request also.
Mr. Thomas said that the Subcommittee also discussed three new work items: the
Residential Planned Community Zoning District (R4); buffering along interstate highways; and
encouraging the development of affordable housing.
Sanitation Authority - 4/13/92 Mtp
Mrs. Copenhaver reported that Chuck Ferris will be replacing Donald Hodgson
on the Sanitation Authority board. Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the Authority has authorized
design and bid funds to construct a 50,000 gallon storage tank on the Authority's Route 642
property that originally was purchased for their offices. This tank will provide pressure to feed,
through looping lines, as far as Stonewall and possibly Clearbrook. Mrs. Copenhaver said that
in the near future, there will be a 50,500 gallon tank at the quarry, a 50,000 gallon tank at the
office site, another 50,000 gallon tank is proposed for the intersection of Route 7 and 1-81, and
including the tank just finished at Stonewall, plus the existing small tank at Greenwood will give
the county a good reservoir of water, plus good water pressure.
Transportation Committee - 4/06/92
Mr. Thomas reported that the Transportation Committee recommended approval
of the Six -Year Secondary Road Improvement Plan and discussed a request from the School
Board for a stop signal to be placed on Route 277 at the intersection of the Sherando High
School and Warrior Drive.
SIX-YEAR SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Action - Recommended Approval
Mr. Evan Wyatt presented the proposed 1992-1993 Six -Year Secondary Road
Improvement Plan for Frederick County. Mr. Wyatt said that the Transportation Committee
recommended that the projects included in this plan maintain the same priority as the plan that
was approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on October 23, 1991.
Mr. Wyatt said that one request was received to revise the plan by Mr. Jim Petry.
The request involves Item #17, the hard -surfacing of Route 629, from Route 608 to Route 622,
which is currently unscheduled. There is a portion of Route 629 beyond (east) Route 622 that
is gravel -surfaced, up to a point where there is a sharp curve, and the remaining portion of the
road from the curve to Middle Road is paved. Mr. Petry felt it would be wise to include the
unpaved portion of Route 629 so the entire road would be completed at the same time. Mr.
Wyatt said that since the project was unscheduled, it would not jeopardize any project that
already had funding. Mr. Wyatt said that the Transportation Committee decided to wait until
fall before revising the plan to include this section.
Mr. Marker asked about the Opequon Bridge construction over Opequon Creek
on Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622)_ Mr. Marker said that the state has repeatedly said that funds
are available and construction would be completed, but nothing has been accomplished. It was
noted that this item was removed from the 1991-1992 Plan as a result of the archeological
survey.
Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Romine,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously
recommend approval of the 1992-1993 Six -Year Secondary Road Improvement Plan for
Frederick County with the following revisions:
1) That the hard -surfacing of Route 629 (#17 under New Hard Surface Road Improvements)
be extended to include the gravel portion of Route 629 that is located between Cedar
Creek Grade (Route 622) and Middle Road (Route 628).
2) The addition of improvements to the bridge over Opequon Creek on Cedar Creek Grade
(Route 622 under Incidental Construction)
4
DISCUSSION REGARDING THE EXTENSION OF SEWER AND WATER SERVICES
TO THE ROUND HILL AREA
No Action
Mr. Tierney said that a request was submitted to the Comprehensive Plan
Subcommittee for extension of the urban development area to include the Round Hill area and
the recommendation from the Subcommittee was for denial. Mr. Tierney said that a study is
currently underway, funded in part by grant money, which is focusing on the Round Hill
Community Center, along with Clearbrook and Brucetown, to determine a cost effective method
for supplying wastewater treatment. He said that the study will run through the summer and is
scheduled to conclude in October. As a result of that study, the Subcommittee hopes to have a
recommendation for some method of handling wastewater in those areas. Mr. Tierney felt that
this study played a part in the Subcommittee's recommendation not to extend the urban
development area at this time.
Mr. Ronald Rhodes, Mr. Forrest Brown, and Mr. Conners, partners of Signal
Station Associates, were in support of supplying sewer and water services to the Round Hill
Community and requested time before the Commission to express their concerns. Mr. Rhodes
said that because failing septic tanks are being pumped on an accelerated basis and because of
the potential for contamination of water supply wells, individual property owners and the
business community are extremely concerned. Mr. Brown said that on an informal basis, they
have collected over 285 signatures from residents of the community who support these services.
Regarding the staff's concern on the perceived risk of runaway development in the
area that would be precipitated by providing sewer and water service to the community, Mr.
Rhodes felt the Comprehensive Plan dictated the permitted areas of development and existing
regulations and controls were established to protect the surrounding areas. Mr. Rhodes said that
either a self-contained community system or an extension of the main line from the hospital area
would serve the community's needs equally well.
Mr. Forrest Brown said that as a business owner (Home Theater Video at Signal
Station), responses from community residents, and from residents as far as Capon Bridge, have
been very positive toward commercial development in their community. Mr. Brown said that
most of the drainfields in this area are failing and he felt a study needed to be done by the
County health services. Mr. Brown said that the community was willing to pay for the system --
their questions now were how can they get the services, what will the services cost, and when
can it be installed.
Mr. Glenwood Nicholson, a store owner since 1966, was also in favor of sewer
and water services being provided for the Round Hill Community. Mr. Nicholson said that he
has been requesting water and sewer services to serve the community since 1972.
Mrs. Sherwood said that the County has designated rural community centers
5
throughout the county and each center is unique according to its size and specific needs. She
said that these centers serve the rural areas of our county with commercial services, fire
companies, churches, etc. Mrs. Sherwood said that the issue of concern is opening the land in
between to development and the impact on the county in dollars. The question was how to serve
the rural development areas with water and sewer without making the rural areas highly
populated or high-density development areas. Mrs. Sherwood felt a solution was possible and
the county was in the process of studying the options.
Mr. Watkins suggested that the Round Hill community appoint a representative
to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) studying the alternative wastewater treatment
facilities in the county. He also suggested that a special meeting could be arranged with
members of the TAC and residents of the Round Hill community to discuss the options available.
Mr. Schroeder, Winchester City Planning Commission Liaison, said that the City
is currently studying the corridor overlay along Amherst Street in hopes of not duplicating the
state of appearance of Routes 50, 7, 11 South, and 11 North. Mr. Schroeder said that the City
is trying to preserve the appearance of that area so that as you approach Winchester, you have
an architecturally pleasing area to view. Mr. Schroeder expressed the need for the City and
County to work together on how this area is developed.
No formal action was taken by the Commission at this time.
DISCUSSION ON THE WINCHESTER AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY WATS
Mr. Watkins said that the Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS) is an
overall study of Winchester and the urban development area of Frederick County to examine the
overall traffic needs in growing areas, particularly in relation to the major roads. Mr. Watkins
reviewed each of the three different parts of the WATS study with the Commission:
1) Short Range Plan - The study has determined which portions of major roads are currently
deficient in terms of geometry, safety, and traffic. Based on this determination, various short
term solutions have been proposed. These improvements include only projects that will either
cost $200,000 or less or projects that are currently programmed by VDOT in their Six -Year
Improvement Programs. The improvements included: a) the currently programmed
improvements to Cedar Creek Grade, Route 522 South, Greenwood Road and Route 647; b)
new traffic signals on Pleasant Valley Avenue and on Cedar Creek Grade at Route 37; c) a
variety of other improvements including bridge and rail crossing improvements, geometric
improvements, turn lanes, sign and signal improvements, parking restrictions, etc.
2) Corridor Studies - The study has examined several interstate interchange areas in order to
address current deficiencies in those areas. Those areas are:
a) Interstate 81/ Route 37/ Route 11/ Route 642
b) Interstate 81/ Route 17-50/ Route 522
c) Interstate 81/ Route II/ Route 37 North
d) Interstate 81/ Route 277/ Route 11 / Route 647.
3) Long Range Planning - Various roads were found to be currently deficient or projected to
be deficient by 2015, including: Route 277, Route 647, Route 642, Route 11 South, Papermill
Road, Cedar Creek Grade, Senseny Road, Greenwood Road, and Route 7. Interstate 81,
between Route 50 and Route 11, was also projected to be deficient. It was noted that
deficiencies on the Interstate would be due to locally generated traffic.
The Commissioners reviewed slides of the study areas and discussed the
recommendations presented by the WATS study. The study was scheduled to be forwarded to
the Transportation Committee's May 4 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 8:30
p.m. by unanimous vote.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert W. Watkins, Secretary
James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 703/678-0682
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II k
RE: Winchester Regional Airport Site Plan
DATE: May 7, 1992
Representatives from the Winchester Regional Airport Authority and Delta Associates Inc.,
will attend the regular meeting of the Frederick County Planning Commission on May 20,
1992 to formally present their site plan. The purpose of this site plan is to create an
ultimate safety area to support the new runway extension at the Winchester Regional
Airport. This project will entail the clearing of approximately sixteen (16) acres of airport
property, the creation of a stormwater detention basin to be shared with Westview Business
Center, some relocation of water, sewer, electric, and gas lines, and the relocation of a
portion of Route 728 (Victory Lane). The improvements to the airport property have been
approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation and will require review and
approval from the County Engineer, the Sanitation Authority, the .Fire Marshal, and the
Planning Department.
The Airport Authority has asked that this site plan be presented to the Planning
Commission on Mav 20, 1992, and the Board of Supervisors on May 27, 1992. This is
necessary to meet the time frame allotted by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
The FAA is responsible for funding 90% of this project. The State and Authority will each
provide 5% of the total cost.
Staff recommends approval of this site plan once all review agency comments are approved.
THE COURTHOUSE COMMONS
9 N. Loudoun Street - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
rA delta associates .e. inc.
consulting engineers - planners
7333 whitepine road
richmond, virginia 23237
May 4, 1992
Mr. Evan Wyatt
Frederick County Planning Dept.
9 Court Square
Winchester, VA 22601
RE: Relocate S.R. 728
Winchester Regional Airport
Winchester, Virginia
AIP Project No. 3-51-0059-08
Delta Project No. VA 9211
Dear Mr. Wyatt:
phone (804) 275-8301
fax (804) 275-8371
Enclosed please find twenty-five (25) sets of plans showing the referenced road relocation. The
Winchester Regional Airport Authority is requesting approval to relocate S.R. 728 outside of
the proposed runway safety area. Please include this request on the meeting agendas for the
Frederick County Planning Commission (May 20, 1992) and the Frederick County Board of
Supervisors (May 27, 1992).
The current runway safety area for Runway 32 at Winchester Regional Area measures 150' x
300'. In order to bring the Runway 32 safety area in to conformance with their requirements,
FAA has approved funding for the design of a safety area measuring 500' x 1000'. The new
safety area is slated for construction beginning in August of 1992. The proposed relocation of
S.R. 728 moves the road out of the new 500"x 1000'_ safety area. FAA does not allow active
roadways in runway safety areas.
The proposed relocated S. R. 728 has been designed in accordance with Virginia Department
of Transportation TC -5, Urban Road Conditions. VDOT has approved the proposed alignment
of S. R. 7228, as shown on these plans. They also have approved road width, right of way
width, and longitudinal and transverse grades. Delta Associates will submit, for the Airport
Authority, a final set of review road plans to all appropriate agencies, including VDOT,
Frederick County Planning, The Frederick County Engineer, and the Airport Authority.
Several utilities are impacted by the road relocation, including public water and sewer, electrical,
phone, and gas service. Delta Associates is coordinating with each of these agencies to insure
that their respective utilities are treated in accordance with the appropriate specifications. Delta
Associates will forward, for the Airport Authority, to the appropriate agencies, a set of review
plans showing all utility work. These agencies include Frederick County Sanitation Authority,
Mr. Evan Wyatt
May 4, 1992
Page Two
The Frederick County Fire Marshall, Potomac Edison, C & P Telephone, Shenandoah Gas, the
Airport Authority, and the impacted property owners (Glaize and North Frederick Realty).
We plan to represent the Airport Authority at the Frederick County Planning Commission
meeting at 7 PM on May 20, 1992 and at the Frederick County Board of Supervisors meeting
at 7:15 PM on May 27, 1992. Because of the project schedule, it is in the best interest of this
project to proceed with the approval requests as soon as possible.
If you should have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact our
office.
Sincerely,
Kenneth W. Brammer, P.E.
Enclosures
cc: Ken Wiegand
VA9211
C049
w/1 enclosure
P/C Review Date: 5/20/92
SUBDIVISION APPLICATION #003-92
BATTLEFIELD PARTNERSHIP
LOCATION: On Route 11 South, approximately 3200' from the Route 37
Interchange
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 75000030000110 and 7500003000011B
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned B-2 (Business General),
present use - vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned B-2 (Business
General), present use - commercial
PROPOSED USE: Streets
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia De t. of Transportation: No objection to street
dedication plat. However, prior to addition of the street to
the State's Secondary System the right-of-way will need to be
constructed in accordance with the approved construction site
plans. Also, the existing 10' gas line easement will need to
be quitclaimed prior to addition.
Fire Marshal: All fire safety comments will be addressed on
individual site plans.
Inspections Department: No comments at this time.
Sanitation Authority_ No comment.
County Engineer: No comments at this time.
Planninq & Zoning: The subdivision of these streets is
required so that they may be dedicated to Frederick County for
01,
their eventual entry into the state secondary road system.
There is an approved master development plan for this project
and this division is in conformance with the MDP. The
northern end of Sulky Drive will be a temporary termination
point and turn around since this street will eventually be
extended further to the north and back out to an additional
intersection with Route 11.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 5/20192 PC MTG.: Approval with the
requirement that all VDOT comments and requirements be satisfied as
requested.
APPLICATION AND CHECKLIST
SUBDIVISION
FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA
Date • -23,/y�:R Application # r�10 s1� / Fee Paid 41/x319.
Applicant/Agent: c�T7`' Le
Address: 3� 3 STc��✓� 6; oc�/< J? c�c�
Te-)- ��` zZE0/
Phone: 11�/(c j - 1' & G 0
Owners name:
Address: 3 �� -S-Tvi✓z 6 r- o Wd
;wc Aes7-teZ2-6ol
Phone: "' 6 7 - , _ p G
Please list names of all owners,' principals and /or majority
stockholders:
iSQN
(L1%� � hh J I,yL Ory
-T-
Contact Person: Q�, �, rf
Phone:
Name of Subdivision: ZD, 46w /c p,-��.t%�
Number of Lots
Total Acreage
Property Location: C),/L, (9-T /// Sou Th i „a i-cx 3 Zc, 0 F -i -
(Give State Rt.#, distance and direction from intersection)
Magisterial District j3a-c- x e- rz z K
Tax ID Number (GPIN) 7S-060-vo3 - o 000 -0000 -pc 1/0
73—00G-003-00GC• -{GOO -UG/iQ
-7-
Property zoning and present use • ,(3 Z UQ C CI -A,7
Adjoining property zoning and use: g:7_ if -o' -7"I (-,- r c C, /
Has a Master Development Plan been submitted for this project?
Yes ✓ No
If yes, has the final MDP been approved by the Board of
Supervisors?
Yes No ✓
What was the MDP title? �c, jz f ,� }�c_y T�vQ S �, . �, jDe re-
Does the plat contain any changes from the approved MDP?
Yes No +�
If yes, specify what changes:
Minimum Lot Size (smallest lot),11,4 Xo Cl- J
Number and types of housing units in this development:
Number N'�
Types ���
SUBDIVISION PLAT
OF A PORTION OF THE LAND OF
HFG PA NERSHIP
BATTLEFIEL
PARTNERSHIP
BACK CREEK
�DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGWIA
fl
/ - I
INT " SNc41
�
ll
p
I tj IX Ll
. • 1 • �1 f��M I n `C1.1^� (` Il\i Y
' /1 j �1 �' �, �)l�`1�' �, • )111 ,
41)
LOCATION MAP r . 2000' r
OWNER'S CERTIFICATE
THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING SUBDIVISION OF THE LAND OF HFG
PARTNERSHIP AND BATTLEFIELD PARTNERSHIP AS APPEARS IN THE
ACCOMPANYING PLAT 13 WITH THE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE DE31RES OF THE UNDEFmGNED OWNERS, PROPRIETORS AND
TRUSTEES, IF ANY.
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE LAPD COWrAt*-rD IN TM 31.115DI MAA
15 A PORTION OF THE LAPID CONVEYED TO BATTLEFIELD PARTNERSHIP
BY DEED DATED FEBRUARY 25, 1985 , RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 590
AT PAGE 411 AND A PORTION OF THE LAPID CONVEYED TO HFG
PARTNER3Hi' BY DEED DATED SEPTEMBER 23, 1985 , RECORDED IN
DEED BOOK 602 AT PAGE 668. THE FOftE*o t DEEDS MAY 9E POLO
AJ40M THE LAPD RECORDS OF FREDERKCC coum TY, vpem&
K BRUCE EDENS LS.
APPROVALS:
Ml DEPT. OF TR4,VF'OR'DiT1ON
FREiaEliC]( C4 3AWDO om MIM
3UNrA`20N ADltliS7RATDA
ZONED : B-2 TAX MAP
USAGE : VACANT 75000-300-0000-0000-00110
SCALE: ASSHOWN_DATE, MARCH 23, 1991
•REVISED : FEBRUARY 28, 1992
�O
K BRUCE EDENS �
No.OD01B2••8
ALL ALVOVNERS
2DWD : B-2
sd'IARATHON DRIVE
DEDICATION AREA
0.915 ACRES
U.S.
R = 35.00
A = 54.96
LOr
6 p 109
P& 5!50 fpc"IL
OMM
USAGE-
ROUTE / /
35' 37' 43" E
/20.00
7A--
35.00'
54.98'
LOt
,p195 L
Q& 666 �iA
LL�6E . G
TABULATION DEDICATED AREAS
MARATHON DRIVE - 0.915 ACRES
SULKY DRIVE :
BATTLEFIELD PARTNERSHIP - 0.575 ACRES
HF6 PARTNERSHIP - 0.067 ACRES
TOTAL DEDICATION AREA - 1.557 ACRES
or
& 13, p 22 L
R
us�j6E
R = 20.00'
A = 31.3P�
i h
h r
�Lo
1
1349?
692
Ib p L
O I LLIAC-f
I
QQQQ
OT �,r
I 1 p 492 . VA
Df- 692
R = 20.00'
i %—A - 31.52'
N 35' 19' 49” E
2Q23'
I
SUL f(Y OR/!/E N 54' 40' 1P' W
50 ' 1910150,00'
----�{i5.19'49"W
SCALE
Or
v L 1� 2 X16
0492
o n N o 692 fl491AC"'t I0 p
I °�1pA6E
STREET DEDICATION PLAT
N 35' 19' 49" E
19.77'
54. 40'11-E SUL /iY OR/1/E
—50.00' 50' R/GY
tor
1
7 492 2
ag;�F . VAS1
MARATHON DRIVE.
BAT-f'LEFIELD PARTNERSHIFI
BACK CREEK', DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
SCALE: I" = 100_ JANUARY 18. 1991
' REVISED : FEBRUARY 28. 1992
o���TH OFL
H. BRUCE EDENS
No. 000162-8
L°r
1111 L
/0
N
I
05A GE
469 3I
_„�C1AL
Da 693 F'
5
05,46E
-
N
or
& 13, p 22 L
R
us�j6E
R = 20.00'
A = 31.3P�
i h
h r
�Lo
1
1349?
692
Ib p L
O I LLIAC-f
I
QQQQ
OT �,r
I 1 p 492 . VA
Df- 692
R = 20.00'
i %—A - 31.52'
N 35' 19' 49” E
2Q23'
I
SUL f(Y OR/!/E N 54' 40' 1P' W
50 ' 1910150,00'
----�{i5.19'49"W
SCALE
Or
v L 1� 2 X16
0492
o n N o 692 fl491AC"'t I0 p
I °�1pA6E
STREET DEDICATION PLAT
N 35' 19' 49" E
19.77'
54. 40'11-E SUL /iY OR/1/E
—50.00' 50' R/GY
tor
1
7 492 2
ag;�F . VAS1
MARATHON DRIVE.
BAT-f'LEFIELD PARTNERSHIFI
BACK CREEK', DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
SCALE: I" = 100_ JANUARY 18. 1991
' REVISED : FEBRUARY 28. 1992
o���TH OFL
H. BRUCE EDENS
No. 000162-8
EXTENSICYv
L1bTE:
,64 7' r�0 s5 5 90 )r S 54' 40'11** E
TEMo TURN-,4ht7UN0 EtbSE�NT TU \ SOOQ'
BE.4B41VDCKEO WAFN SUL,YYGYQ /S / j h
EXTENDED. Zt
Z
Q� I
ti
a LOT /6
LOT /9 \ 3 0,6 692 P. 490
U�4GE: WC4NT
0"B. 692R 4917 W Q
USAGE: WC41VT a�
DEDICATED AREA
"LEFIELD PARTNERSHIP - 0.575 ACRES
HFG PARTNERSHIP - 0.067 ACRES
h
L 07-
69P
T692 P" 490
6CWGE.• WC•4N7'
SCALE:
ZOT/2
D.B 73/ P. 2P3 c�
1's4GE.• C2: iat-1FC/AL �
V. 1
T- ��
OrED = 51'1.9'04"
R = 25.00' N,O
A=2239'
T = /2.0/'
Ir LOT/5
!q D.B 692 P" 490
1,.S4GE: VACANT
CH = N 60. 59'21" W �1
2/.65'
A Op6f
RT65P
/
R = 55.00* N6-
STREETDEDICATION PLAT
SULKY DRIVE
BATTLEFIELD PARTNERSHIP
BACK CREEK DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
I
LDATE t MARCH 25 1991
_— -
ALL ADJOINERS
ZONED : B-2
,n� = 5/' 19'04
R = 25.00'
A =22.39'
T = /2.0/'
CH = 5 09' 40'15- W
2/.65'
GAS LAI-EAS'tl&NT
REVISED : FEBRUARY 28, 1992
SCALE
0
p
v H. BRUCE EDENS
No. 000162-8
LOT /4
SULKY DRIVE
,OB 692 P. 490
C@£4G£: kMC*Vr
DEDICATION AREA
0.642 ACRES
_
N 54' 40' //'• W
50.00
L OT /6
692 P. 490
M,4R4rf�0N OR.
USAGE: l�aC4NT
50 _R/GY_ s'q
SSL As� cE
R/W 14 /.
;q
�
a
S 54. 40'11** E
50.00'
SCALE:
ZOT/2
D.B 73/ P. 2P3 c�
1's4GE.• C2: iat-1FC/AL �
V. 1
T- ��
OrED = 51'1.9'04"
R = 25.00' N,O
A=2239'
T = /2.0/'
Ir LOT/5
!q D.B 692 P" 490
1,.S4GE: VACANT
CH = N 60. 59'21" W �1
2/.65'
A Op6f
RT65P
/
R = 55.00* N6-
STREETDEDICATION PLAT
SULKY DRIVE
BATTLEFIELD PARTNERSHIP
BACK CREEK DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
I
LDATE t MARCH 25 1991
_— -
ALL ADJOINERS
ZONED : B-2
,n� = 5/' 19'04
R = 25.00'
A =22.39'
T = /2.0/'
CH = 5 09' 40'15- W
2/.65'
GAS LAI-EAS'tl&NT
REVISED : FEBRUARY 28, 1992
SCALE
0
p
v H. BRUCE EDENS
No. 000162-8
P/C Review Date: 5/20/92
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
#004-92
FREETON
LOCATION: On the west side and adjacent to Route 641,
approximately 0.2 miles north of Route 277
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 860000A0000040, 860000A0000050,
860000A0000080, and 860000A0000090
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned R -P (Residential Performance)
land use - vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned R -P (Residential
Performance), B-1 (Neighborhood Business), and B-3 (Industrial
District) Land use - residential, commercial, Fraternal
Organization and vacant
PROPOSED USE: 18 Townhouses
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation: See attachment letter from
Robert Childress, dated March 25, 1992.
Fire Marshal: Posted fire lanes required at all fire hydrants
per Frederick County Chpt. 10. The location of the hydrant on
site makes access to it very difficult. It should be
relocated onto the traffic island to the southwest. Access
for emergency vehicles during construction must be maintained
at all times. No burning of construction debris is permitted
on site.
Inspections Department: Building shall comply with the
Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 305, Use
2
Group R (Residential) of the BOCA National Building Code 1990.
Sanitation Authority: First review - 14 items, correct and
resubmit.
Count Engineer: See attachment dated April 27, 1992.
Parks & Recreation: As per the revision on sheet 2, dated
March 19, 1992, it appears that this plan meets the open space
and recreational area requirements.
Frederick Co. Public Schools: See attached letter from Thomas
Sullivan, dated March 23, 1992.
Planning & ZonincL The proposed townhouses are a permitted
use in the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District. The
area of this site is 2.49 acres. The proposed 18 townhouse
units creates a density of 7.2 units per acre. This meets the
maximum gross density of 8 units per acre for this type of
housing.
Staff has two concerns regarding the Master Development Plan.
The first concern regards buffer and screening requirements
for this project. The applicant is required to provide an "A"
category buffer along the B-1 (Neighborhood Business)
properties. This type of buffer requires no landscaping if
structures are located at least fifty foot from the adjoining
property line. The applicant meets this requirement and plans
to leave the existing trees and vegetation behind units 1-9.
The applicant however, has not provided an adequate buffer
along the properties owned by the Williams and the Tigneys.
The residential separation buffer for structures that are 100
feet from the property line requires full screening. This
type of screening requires a six foot high opaque fence, wall,
mound, or berm, as well as a ten foot landscaped easement that
contains three trees (2/3 evergreen 1/3 deciduous) per ten
linear feet.
The second concern regards the location of the parking lot by
unit #18. A 25 foot strap of property has been dedicated to
Frederick County for future improvements to Route 641. When
this is complete, the parking lot will border on Route 641.
Section 3-3-2.5 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance
requires that all parking lots be located no closer than five
feet from any property line.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS_FOR _5Z20/92 PC MTG.: Approval, provided
3
that an adequate full screen buffer is provided along the RP
property lines, the parking lot is setback at least f ive (5) feet
from the twenty-five foot dedication for Route 641, and all review
agency comments are adequately addressed.
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PIAN
Frederick County
Virginia
Date: 22 Aoril 1992 Application #
OWNERS NAME: JASBO, INC & JAMES M STEWART JR
P.O. Box 6 / 368 Buchinaham Dr.
Stejohens City, VA 221L5_Z S C VA 22655
James L. Bowman & James M. Stewart
(Please list the name of all owners or parties in interest)
APPLICANT/AGENT: JASBO, INC / G W CLIFFORD & ASSOC INC
Address: P.O. BOX 6 / 200 N CAMERON ST
STEPHENS CITY VA -L—WINCHESTER, VA 22601
Phone Number:_ (703) 869-1800 / (703) 667-2139
DESIGNER/DESIGN COMPANY: G.W. CLIFFORD & ASSOC. INC
Address:
Phone Number: (703) 667-2139
Contact Name: DOUG. LEGGE
L r 2 ryr fr
i fir? 2 7 iO-?
PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
CHECKLIST
The following checklist is intended to assist the applicant in
insuring that all required information is provided and to insure
that all information is available to allow review by the County.
This form must be completed by the applicant and submitted with
the master development plan. All required items must be provided
on the master development plan.
BackcTround Inf ormat ion:
1. Development's name: FREETON
2. Location of property: West side & adjacent to Route 641
aipprox. 0.2 miles north of Route 277
3. Total area of property: 2.4911 Acres (Net)
4. Property ID #: 86-A-4, 86-A-5,_ 86-A-8 & 86 -A-9
5. Property zoning and present use: RP (Vacant)
6. Adjoining property zoning and present use: RP, B-1 & B-2
(Residential, Commercial fraternal oraanization & vacant)
7. Proposed Uses: Townhouses
8. Magisterial District: Ovecruon
9. Is this an original or amended Master Development Plan?
Original—X– Amended
General Information:
1. Have the following items been included?
North arrow
Yes
X
No
Scale
Yes—X—
No
Legend
Yes
0
No
Boundary Survey
Yes—X_
_X_
No
Total Area
Yes—X—
0
No
Topography
Yes
X_
No
Project Title
Yes—k—
—0.9
No
Preparation and Revision Date
Yes�X
No
Applicant Signed Consent Stmt
Yes
No
2. Number of phases proposed? ONE (1}
3. Are the proposed phases shown on the Master Development Plan?
Yes_.X_ No
4. Are the uses of adjoining properties clearly designated?
Yes—X— No
5. Is an inset map provided showing the location of the project
and all public roads within 2,000 feet.
Yes --.X— No
6. Are all land uses clearly shown? Yes—X— No
7. Are environmental features clearly shown?
Yes—X— No
8. Describe the following environmental features:
Total Area
s Disturbed
Area in
Open Space
Floodplains
0
0
0
Lakes and ponds
0
0—
0
Natural retention areas
0
0
0
Steep slopes (15% +)
0
0
0
Woodlands
_1.2
—0.9
—0.1
9. Are the following shown on the master development plan?
Street layout
Yes
_X_No
Entrances
Yes
Parking areas
Yes_X__No
_XNo
Utilities (mains)
Yes
X
No
10. Has a conceptual stormwater management plan been provided?
Ye s_X_No
11. Have all historical structures been identified?
Ye s_X_No
Residential Uses
If the Master Development Plan includes any land zoned RP,
(Residential Performance) or any residential uses, the following
items should be completed.
1. What numbers and housing types are proposed?
3 Buildings consisting of 18 Townhouse Units
2. Is a schedule provided describing each of the following in
each phase:
Open space acreage Yes _X_No
Acreage in each housing type Yes_X_No
Acreage in streets and right of ways Yes No_X_
Total acreage Yes_X_No
Number of dwellings of each type Yes_X_No
3. What percentage of the total site is to be placed in common
open space? U
a. Are recreational facilities required? Yes_X_No
5. What types of recreational facilities are proposed?
1 Tot Lot
6. Are separation buffers required? Yes_X_No _
7. Are road efficiency buffers required? Yes_X_No,
8. Are landscaping or landscaped screens required?
Yes No_X_
Please list all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning
property adjacent to both sides, to the rear, and in front
(across the street) of the property in question. Please list the
name, address, and most importantly, the complete 21 -digit
property identification number. This information may be obtained
from the Commissioner of Revenue's office.
Name: Lawrence A. Williams
Address: P.O. Box 184 Stephens City Va 22655
Property I.D.#: 86-A-2
Name: Arthur & Kathleen Ticrnev Jr
Address: P.O. Box 201 Stephens City, Va 22655
Property I.D.#: 86-A-3
Name: Clyde Williams
Address: 307 N. Kent St. Winchester Va 22601
Property I.D.#: 75-A-60
Name: JASBO, INC
Address: P.O. Box 6 Stephens City, Va 22655
Property I.D.#: 86-A-6
Name: Charles M. Cain
Address: 5296 Mulberry Ct. Stephens City, Va 22655
Property I.D.#: 86-A-7
Name: JENI Co.
Address: P.O. Box 2598 Winchester. Va 22601
Property I.D.#: 86-A-10
Name: VFW
Address: Stephens City, Va 22655
Property I.D.#: 86-A-13
Name: infest Virainia Bakina Co Inc
Address: Drawer 308 Bluefield WVA 24701
Property I.D.#: 86 -A -14A
Name: JASBO, INC.
Address: P.O. Box 6 Stephens City, Va 22655
Property I.D.#: 86-A-14
Name: Yee W. Yam
Address: 2655 Valley Ave. Winchester Va 22601
Property I.D.#: 86 -A -15A
COA/f1VOIN VEALTH of VIRC- INIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. O. BOX 278
RAY D. PETHTEL EDINBURG, 22824 WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN
COMMISSIONER RESIDENT ENGINEER
March 25, 1992 TELE (7031984-4133
FAX (703) 984-8761
Mr. Douglas C. Legge, C.L.S. Ref: Freeton Townhouse Development
C/O G. W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Route 641
200 North Cameron Street Frederick County
P. O. Box 2104
Winchester, VA 22601
Dear Doug:
As requested we have reviewed the referenced site plan, dated. March, 1992.
Our recommendations may be found on the enclosed plans marked in red and as follows:
1. The proposed CG -9D entrance gutter is to be revised to a standard design for
entrances along roadways with shoulders. The entrance is to be constructed with
CG -6 curb and guttering with 20' radii, 10' pavement offset from the edge of
pavement to the face of gutter pan and 30' tapers.
2. A half typical section with the pavement design as noted is to be incorporated into
the plans.
3. A 4' earthen shoulder is to be constructed along Route 641 across the entire
property frontage with ditch lines adjusted as necessary.
4. All vegetation along the property frontage is to be removed to obtain minimum
sight distances.
Please revise and resubmit four (4) copies for final approval. Should any changes be deemed
necessary, please design them to meet or exceed the above recommendations.
Should you have any questions, please let me know.
Sincerely,
W. H. Bushman, Trans. Resident Engr.
RBC/rf By: R. B. Childress, Hwy. Permits & Subd. Spec. Sr.
Enclosures
COUNTY of FREDERICE:
Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P. E.
Director of Engineering & Inspection,
703/665 -564 -
FAX: 703/678-068--
FREDERICK
03/678-068=
FREDERICK COUNTY ENGINEER
9 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET, 2ND FLOOR
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(7 03) 665 -5 64 3
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SUBDIVISION & SITE PLAN
DATE: April 27, 1992
PROJECT: Freeton Townhouse Development
Route 641/0.2 miles North of Route 277 East
Opequon Magisterial District
Frederick County, Virginia
DESIGNER: Doug Legge
G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc.
200 North Cameron Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
COMMENTS
1. Sheet 3/5:
Revise grading to reflect a crest elevation of 766. at the
detention basin to correspond with the design calculations.
The crest width should be at least three (3) feet to
facilitate maintenance.
2. Sheet 3/5:
Relineate width of emergency spillway required to pass 100
year storm.
3. Sheet 3/5:
Consider the use of a riser in conjunction with the eight
(8) inch CMP to deter clogging. The riser should be
equipped with a grated opening that can be maintained.
4. Sheet 3/5•
Provide siltation control at influent end of eight (8) inch
CMP.
Freeton Townhouse Development
Page Two
April 27, 1992
5. Sheet 3/5:
Provide spot elevations in parking lot.
6. Sheet 3/5:
Provide sidewalk cross section.
1
Harvey E strawsnyder,
Direct C
of Engineering
Frederick County Public Schools
1415 Amherst Street
Post Office Box 3508
Winchester, Virginia 22601-2708
Telephone: (703) 662-3888 — FAX (703) 722-2788
Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent
March 23, 1992
G. W. Clifford & Assoc.
200 N. Cameron Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Attention: Doug Legge
Dear Doug:
I am in receipt of your request for master development
plan, subdivision and site plan comments for FREETON by JASBO,
Inc. at the following location: west side and adjacent to
Route 641 and identified as tax parcels 86-A-4, 86-A-5, 86-A-8
and 86-A-9. ,
It is our understanding that the proposed use of this
property is for the construction of three buildings consisting
of 18 townhouse units.
We feel that this development will have an impact on
current and future school facilities. We recommend that
these concerns be addressed during the approval process.
Please feel free to contact me at your earliest
convenience if you should require any additional information.
Sincerely,
Thomas Sullivan
Administrative Assistant to
the Superintendent
TS /pkf
PREDICTED TRAFFIC TOTALS
Freeton Townhouse Development
Frederick County, VA
Apr -91
TRIP GENERATION STATISTICS
SOURCE INSTITUTE TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, Trip Generation, 4th Ed
TRIP GENERATION Code 230 Residential Condominium Residences
Density @ 18 Dwelling Units
STATISTIC Predicted Rate Per Total
Dwelling Unit Trips
Average Weekday 5.857 105
Vehicle Trip Ends
Weekday Vehicle Trip 0.561 10
Ends During PM Peak
Hour Adjacent Street
Weekday Vehicle Trip 0.544 10
,ds During PM Peak
Hour Generator
Weekday Vehicle Trip 86
Ends Less PM Peaks
traffic generation for 18 hrs
One Way Vehicle Trips/Hour = 5 (non peak hours)
Average Weekend 5.666 102
Vehicle Trip Ends
Weekend Vehicle Trip Q.474 9
Ends During PM Peak
Hour Generator
Weekend Vehicle Trip 93
Ends Less PM Peaks
traffic generation for 18 hrs
Average Weekend Vehicle Trips/Hour 6 (non peak hours)
Entrance Percentage of Total Traffic Weekday Trip Ends Weekend Trip Ends
Entering Development (avg/non-peak hr.) (avg/non-peak hr.)
VA Rte 641
100 %
The Total Trips Generated By This Development =
5 6
105 trips per day
P/C Review Date: 5/20/92
SUBDIVISION APPLICATION
#004-92
FREETON
LOCATION: On the west side and adjacent
approximately 0.2 miles north of Route 277.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 860000A0000040,
860000A0000080, and 860000A0000090
to Route 641,
860000A0000050,
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned R -P (Residential Performance)
land use - vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
Performance), B-1 (Neighborhood Business)
Transition District) land use - residential
Organization and vacant.
PROPOSED USE: 18 Townhouses
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Zoned R -P (Residential
and B-3 (Industrial
commercial, Fraternal
Virginia Dept. of Transportation: See attachment letter from
Robert Childress, dated March 25, 1992.
Fire Marshal: Posted fire lanes required at all fire hydrants
per Frederick County Chpt. 10. The location of the hydrant on
site makes access to it very difficult. It should be
relocated onto the traffic island to the southwest. Access
for emergency vehicles during construction must be maintained
at all times. No burning of construction debris is permitted
on site.
Inspections Department' Building shall comply with the
Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 305, Use
Group R (Residential) of the BOCA National Building Code 1990.
2
Sanitation Authority: First review - 14 items, correct and
resubmit.
Countv Engineer: See attachment dated April 27, 1992.
Parks & Recreation: As a result of the revision on sheet 2,
dated March 19, 1992, it appears that this plan meets the open
space and recreational area requirements.
Frederick Co. Public Schools: See attached letter from Thomas
Sullivan, dated March 23, 1992.
Plannincr & Zoning: This subdivision application is in
conformance with the Master Plan and complies with the
Subdivision. Ordinance requirements. Several review agency
comments still need to be addressed; however, there are no
items of a high enough magnitude to delay this application.
Some of the items yet to be addressed will be handled at the
site plan stage.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 5/20/92 IPC MTG.: Approval with the
following conditions:
1. That all review agency comments are adequately addressed.
2. That the Master Plan is approved by the Board of
Supervisors.
A.PPLICATION AND CHECKLIST
SUBDIVISION
FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA
Date: 22 April 1992 Application Fee Paid
Applicant/Agent: G.W. Clifford & Associates Inc.
Address: 200 N. Cameron t.
Winchester Va 22601
Phone: (703) 667-2139
Owners name: JASBO INC. & JAMES M. ST. RT JR.
Address: P.O. Box 6 / 368 Buckingham Dr.
Stephens Citv. Va 22655
Phone: (703) 869-1800
Please list names of all owners, principals, and/or majority
stockholders:
James L. Bowman
James M. Stewart Jr.
Contact person: _Doucr LeQcxe
Phone: (703) 667-2139
Name of Subdivision: FREETON
Number of Lots: 18 Total Acreage:_ 2.4911 (Net)
Property Location: West side & adjacent to Route 641
approx. 0.2 miles north of Route 277
(Give State Rt.#, distance and direction from intersection)
Magisterial District: O gonion
Tax ID Number: 86 -A -4,-86-A-5, 86-A-8 & 86-A-9
Property zoning and present use: RP (Vacant)
Adjoining property zoning and use: RP. B-1 & B-3
(Residential, Commercial Fraternal Organization & Vacant)
Has a master Development Pian been submitted for this project?
Yes X No
If yes, has the final MDP been approved by the Board of
Supervisors? Yes No X
What was the MDP title? FREETON
Does the plat contain any changes from the approved MDP?
Yes No X
If yes, specify what changes.
Minimum Lot Size (smallest lot): 1700 sf
Number and types of housing units in this development:
Number 18
Types Townhouses
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. O. BOX 278
RAY D. PETHTEL EDINBURG, 22824 WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN
COMMISSIONER RESIDENT ENGINEER
March 25, 1992 TELE (703) 984-4133
FAX (703) 984-9761
Mr. Douglas C. Legge, C.L.S. Ref: Freeton Townhouse Development
C/O G. W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Route 641
200 North Cameron Street Frederick County
P. O. Box 2104
Winchester, VA 22601
Dear Doug:
As requested we have reviewed the referenced site plan dated March, 1992.
Our recommendations may be found on the enclosed plans marked in red and as follows:
1. The proposed CG -913 entrance gutter is to be revised to a standard design for
entrances along roadways with shoulders. The entrance is to be constructed with
CG -6 curb and guttering with 20' radii, 10' pavement offset from the edge of
pavement to the face of gutter pan and 30' tapers.
2. A half typical section with the pavement design as noted is to be incorporated into
the plans.
3. A 4' earthen shoulder is to be constructed along Route 641 across the entire
property frontage with ditch lines adjusted as necessary.
4. All vegetation along the property frontage is to be removed to obtain minimum
sight distances.
Please revise and resubmit four (4) copies for final approval. Should any changes be deemed
necessary, please design them to meet or exceed the above recommendations.
Should you have any questions, please let me know.
Sincerely,
W. H. Bushman, Trans. Resident Engr.
RBC/rf By: R. B. Childress, Hwy. Permits & Subd. Spec. Sr.
Enclosures
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P. .
Director of Engineering & Inspect-
Ion-
701)/665-56;.--
FAX:
nspection703/665-56;.FAX: 703/678-06S--
FREDERICK
03/678-06,5=
FREDERICK COUNTY ENGINEER
9 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET, 2ND FLOOR
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22603
(703) 665-5643
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SUBDIVISION & SITE PLAN
DATE: April 27, 1992
PROJECT: Freeton Townhouse Development
Route 641/0.2 miles North of Route 277 East
Opequon Magisterial District
Frederick County, Virginia
DESIGNER: Doug Legge
G- W. Clifford & Associates, Inc.
200 North Cameron Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
COMMENTS
1. Sheet 3/5:
Revise grading to reflect a crest elevation of 766. at the
detention basin to correspond with the design calculations.
The crest width should be at least three (3) feet to
facilitate maintenance.
2. Sheet 3/5:
Relineate width of emergency spillway required to pass l00
year storm.
3. Sheet 3 5:
Consider the use of a riser in conjunction with the eight
(8) inch CMP to deter clogging. The riser should be
equipped with a grated opening that can be maintained.
4. Sheet 3/5:
Provide siltation control at influent end of eight (8) inch
CMP.
9 North I ni,<Initn Ct _ ID rN
Freeton Townhouse Development
Page Two
April 27, 1992
5. Sheet 3/5•
Provide spot elevations in parking lot.
6. Sheet 3/5:
Provide sidewalk cross section.
HarveyE Strawsnyder,
Direct r of Engineering
Frederick County Public Schools
1415 Amherst Street
Post Office Box 3508
Winchester, Virginia 22601-2708
Telephone: (703) 662-3888 — FAX (703) 722-2788
Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent
March 23, 1992
G. W. Clifford & Assoc.
200 N. Cameron Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Attention: Doug Legge
Dear Doug:
I am in receipt of your request for master development
plan, subdivision and site plan comments for FREETON by JASBO,
Inc. at the following location: west side and adjacent to
Route 641 and identified as tax parcels 86-A-41, 86-A-5, 86-A-8,
and 86-A-9.
It is our understanding that the proposed use of this
property is for the construction of three buildings consisting
of 18 townhouse units.
We feel that this development will have an impact on
current and future school facilities. We recommend that
these concerns be addressed during the approval process.
Please feel free to contact me at your earliest
convenience if you should require any additional information.
Sincerely,.
Thomas Sullivan
Administrative Assistant to
the Superintendent
TS/pkf
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 703/678-0682
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Transportation Committee
RE: WATS Recommendations
DATE: May 6, 1992
The Transportation Committee met on May 4, 1992, to discuss the Winchester Area
Transportation Study and to give recommendations concerning the interchanges. Overall,
the Committee recommended an order of priority for the interchanges listed under short
term recommendations. The Committee felt that once funding was available, the first
interchange to be improved should be the Route 11N/Route 37/Interstate 81, followed by
the interchange at Route 277, then that at Route 50.
The Committee felt that each of the interchanges should be reworked, and several schemes
presented to the public prior to construction. Several problems were noted at the
interchange at Route 277. The Committee did not like the proposal of Route 647 as one
way northbound, nor adding the bridge crossing. The Committee suggested creating a right
turn lane on Route 647 and adding a right turn signal at this location to keep traffic flowing.
They did, however, agree that Route 277 should be widened. The Committee felt that the
interchange at Route 50 should be reevaluated, but felt the short term proposal may be the
best solution. Although the Committee felt the Route 11N/Route 37/Interstate 81 should
have top priority, no specific revisions to this interchange were proposed.
FS/sk
THE COURTHOUSE COMMONS
9 N. Loudoun Street - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
v
F
539— A
229----1 C J
>t s,
m
�o
mm m
4
f _
�— sst£a I
t- 264Jul
Jubal Early Drive
LEGEND
O• tAvef of SaMce Oafidaney to
• Level of Smka lot Spadeo
Movement at Defldent Locadon
• D r- r �ea�° D
to
o
Note: Traffic volumes shown are based on intersection counts and tube counts (for ramps) taken on
different dates and may not match at adjacent locations.
Recommendations for improvement will not be made for deficiencies at unsignalized Intersections where
there are less than 100 vehicles making the deficient movement.
3-13
r(For
Non"411 nglg $
)cf
N
b
a.
j
Figure 3-a
Interstate 81/Route 17-
50/Route 522
PM Peak Hour
Forecasted Traffic
Volumes and Level of
Service Deficiencies
Study Year (1994)
WINCHESTER
AREA
TRANSPORTATION
STUDY
CORRIDOR
STUDIES
RM.
Fe
Jubal Early Drlve
LEGEND
111111111111 - Construct New Roadway
® - Upgrade or Widen Existing Roadway
OEM - Remove Roadway
3 - 14
Figure 3-9
Lane I
00,
Widen to
Accomodate Left
Turn Lane
)rC '
L
CWINCHESTER
AREA
rCV TRANSPORTATION
STUDY
CORRIDOR
�° STUDIES
Interstate 81/Route 17.
Deceleration/
50/Route 522
:Extnd
1 celeration Lane
orth of Abrams
Recommended
trees
Improvements (1994)
Lane I
00,
Widen to
Accomodate Left
Turn Lane
)rC '
L
CWINCHESTER
AREA
rCV TRANSPORTATION
STUDY
CORRIDOR
�° STUDIES
4
no
M.
Not To Scale
Note: Traffic volumes shown are based on Intersection counts and tube counts (for ramps) taken on
different dates and may not match at adjacent locations,
Recommendatlons for Improvement will not be made for deficiencies at unsignalized Intersections where
there are less than 100 vehicles making the deficient movement.
2-13
sA
✓ psA Ag2
11
Figure 2-8
Interstate 81/Route
11/Route 37 North
PM Peak Hour
Forecasted Traffic
Volumes and Level of
Service Deficiencies
Study Year (1994)
WINCHESTER
AREA
TRANSPORTATION
STUDY
CORRIDOR
STUDIES
1-1
0
2 - 14
Figure 2-9
Interstate 81/Route
11/Route 37 North
Recommended
Improvements (1994)
WINCHESTER
AREA
TRANSPORTATION
STUDY
CORRIDOR
STUDIES
n
/-! F
Not To Scale
VVV/` o�
9dto-
Ifs.
y
-450
Route 277
542-
D
1
J.
I F�
Note: Traffic volumes shown are based on Intersection counts and tube counts (for ramps) taken on
different dates and may not match at adjacent locations.
Recommendations for Improvement will not be made for deficiencies at wtsignalized Intersections where
there are less than 100 vehicles making the deficient movement.
5-11
Figure 5.7
Interstate 81/Route
277/Route 11/Route
647
Mid -Day Peak Hour
Forecasted Traffic
Volumes and Level of
Service Deficiencles
Study Year (1994)
WINCHESTER
AREA
TRANSPORTATION
STUDY
CORRIDOR
STUDIES
I&
Not To Scale
5 - 13
Figure 5-9
Interstate 81/Route
277/Route 11/Route
647
Recommended
Improvements (1994)
WINCHESTER
AREA
TRANSPORTATION
STUDY
CORRIDOR
STUDIES
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
I COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 703/678-0682
MEMORANDUM
Frederick County Planning Commission
Robert W. Watkins, Director �w
Winchester Medical Center Proposal for New Interchange on Route
37 West
May 8, 1992
The Winchester Medical Center is proposing to construct a new interchange on Route 37
West between the interchanges on Route 50 and Route 522. This interchange would be
designed to provide access to properties to the east of Route 37. Information is attached.
The Medical Center is asking the Board of Supervisors to pass a resolution of support at
their meeting on May 27. A recommendation from the Planning Commission concerning
support for or opposition to this project would be appropriate.
Please let me know if you have questions.
RWW/slk
THE COURTHOUSE COMMONS
9 N. Loudoun Street - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
MAY- 8-92 FRI 1540 WIN(' MED CENTER FAX NO. 17'''7228019 P.02
Winchester Medical Center
Route 37 Interchange Proposal
Winchester Medical Center moved to its existing location in ,january, 1990. The Medical
Center campus is comprised of approximately 150 acres. Approximately 1/3 of the campus
has been developed with the construction of the Hospital, Medical Office Buildings, Surgi-
Center, Out -Patient Diagnostic Center, Adolescent Psychiatric Hospital, and ChildCare
Centers,
All of the land at the campus is zoned MC (Medical Center). The MC district allows a wide
variety of health related and to sonie extent non -health related uses. The Medical Center has
developed a master plan for the campus suggesting possible uses on identified building sites.
The potential uses identified, even though they may not ultimately materialize in the exact
form through which they were envisioned, represent full development of the 150 acre campus.
The Medical Center is in the process of identifying the infrastructure required to support that
level of development. The traffic generated from these uses is anticipated to be substantial.
The two (2) Amherst Street entrances have been recognized as incapable of handling all of the
future development. Consequently, the concept of an interchange on Rte, 37 midway between
Rtes. 50 and 522 has been identified as a solution for the traffic problem associated with more
fully developing the campus. A traffic study has been completed by The Cox Company and
accepted by the Virginia Department of Transportation as the basis for the interchange.
The Medical Center has received preliminary approval from the appropriate State and Federal
agencies regarding the interchange. The Medical Center Board has agreed to upfront up to
$3,500,000 to support the construction of the interchange. The County and City
Government's endorsement of the Rte. 37 interchange proposal is necessary for the Highway
Commission to give final approval for the interchange. For this reason, the Winchester
Medical Center respectfully requests endorsement through a resolution by the County Board
of Supervisors for the Construction of an interchange on Rte. 37 midway between Rtes. 50 and
522.
We To
mw orr,
PUS MASTER PIAN
lb PHASE THREE:
MEDICAL CAMPUS TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMEi1TTS
(WITH NEW RT. 37 FULL DIAMOND Z1tPMCHANGE)
-,_I.WP s.R
Emw
Im
• � s r +.r.
k:
m
Q.
n
Q
lbl
3
c
N
.70
0
o')
Q
N
4
cs-i
�
o
-,.
k:
m
Q.
n
Q
lbl
3
c
N
.70
0
o')
yw
FW=i