The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDRRC 06-23-05 Meeting AgendaCOUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM To: Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee From: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator IfIA, e_ - Subject: June Meeting and Agenda Date: June 16, 2005 The .Frederick County Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) will be meeting on Thursday, June 23, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. in the first floor conference room (purple room) of the County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. The DRRS will discuss the following agenda items: AGENDA 1) Discussion: Implementation of Rural Area Study. Staff is seeking input from the DRRS regarding the Rural Area Study for codification. This discussion will include a draft of a new zoning district. (See attachments) 2) Other Access to this building is limited during the evening hours. Therefore, it will be necessary to enter the building through the rear door of the four-story wing. I would encourage committee members and interested citizens 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. MRC/bad Attachments 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 • C: • Item # 1 Rural Areas Study Staff is seeking input from the DRRS regarding the Rural Areas study. Frederick County conducted a study of the rural areas from 2003 through 2005. This study included a rezoning option in the rural areas of the County. This new zoning district would be titled the Rural Residential District (RRD), and will include new lot size and design standards. A copy of the proposed Rural Residential District (RRD) and Rural Area Study are included for your review. ARTICLE V-1 RRD RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 165-57.1 Purpose and intent. This district preserves large tracts of land for agriculture and forestry, while allowing residential development. This district provides for orderly development of land located in the rural areas of Frederick County, preserving its rural character through lot clustering, and promotion of open space preservation. This district provides an opportunity for land uses which cluster residential lots while preserving significant portions of the parent tract. No rural residential development, nor rezoning to the Rural Residential District shall be approved for less than 100 acres. 165-57.2 Permitted Uses. Structures and land shall be used for one of following uses: A. Detached single-family dwellings. B. Equine, farming, forestry, and horticulture activities. C. Home occupations. D. Museums and historic sites used for educational or historic purposes. E. Private or public parks and community centers. F. Natural conservation areas. G. Public water and sewer facilities. H. Accessory structures. 165-57.3 Conditional Uses. Uses permitted with a conditional use permit shall be as follows: A. Commercial outdoor recreation. B. Day-care facilities. (size considerations?) 165-57.4 Permitted residential density A. The maximum gross density permitted on any parcel or group of parcels shall not exceed the equivalent of one unit per five acres as determined by the size of the parent tract as it existed or on the date of adoption of this section. B. The minimum size of a preservation tract shall be 50 percent of the parent tract. The preservation tract shall not count against the permitted density of the parent tracts. C. Exception to permitted density. a. In developments where more than 60 percent of the parent tract is designated as the preservation tract, a density bonus up to 25 percent may be granted by the Board of Supervisors at the time of the rezoning consideration. b. In developments where more than 70 percent of the parent tract is designated as the preservation tract, a density bonus of up to 50 percent may be granted by the Board of Supervisors at the time of the rezoning consideration. 165-57.5 Rural residential design standards. A. The minimum lot size for permitted uses shall be thirty thousand (30,000) square feet. B. Minimum lot setbacks shall be as follows: 1) Front setback: The front setback for any principal structure shall be sixty (60) feet from any existing state maintained road and forty-five (45) feet from the right -of -away of any road constructed to serve the subdivision. 2) Side setback: The side setback for any principal structure shall be fifteen (15) feet from any side lot line. Lots abutting the preservation parcel and agricultural uses shall be setback one hundred (100) feet from any side lot line. Lots abutting orchard uses shall be setback two hundred (200) feet from any side line. 3) Rear setback: The rear setback for any principal structure shall be forty (40) feet from any rear lot line. Lots abutting the preservation parcel and agricultural uses shall be setback one hundred (100) feet from any side lot line. Lots abutting orchard uses shall be setback two hundred (200) feet from any side line. 4) Accessory uses: The minimum setback for any accessory use shall be fifteen (15) feet from any side and rear lot line. C. Maximum building height shall not exceed thirty-five (35) feet. D. Minimum lot width; maximum depth. 1) Minimum width. The minimum width for rural residential lots fronting roads proposed for dedication to the public shall be one hundred (100) feet at the front setback, with the exception of lots fronting on a turnaround of a cul-de-sac which shall have a minimum width at setback of fifty (50) feet. The minimum setback width for all other lots shall be 250 feet at the front setback line. 2) Maximum depth. Maximum depth for any lot shall not exceed four times its width at the front setback line. 165-57.5 Sewer and water facilities. Rural residential developments shall be served by private on-site health systems. The Board of Supervisors may approve the use of public sewer and water facilities, so long as the facilities are owned by or dedicated to a public authority. In no case shall a rural residential development utilize the public sewer and water systems which would require their extension outside of the Urban Development Area and/or the Sewer and Water Service Area, as designated by the county's Comprehensive Policy Plan. When a development is located adjacent to a defined Rural Community Center, the proposed sewer and water facilitiy should be designed and built to accommodate a capacity of 50 percent greater than that capacity necessary to serve the proposed development. 165-_57.6 Roads. All roads shall be built to state road requirements, and dedicated to the state for public use. The Board of Supervisors may grant a waiver to the dedication requirements for unusual circumstance, but in no case may waive the state road design and construction criteria. 165-57.7 Master Development Plan. All land within a rural residential development must be included on an approved master development plan prior to land subdivision. DRAFT - 6%6/0-5 Rural Areas Study Draft Plan —June 6, 2005 _1_ DRAFT — 6/6/0; Table of Contents Introduction Background Goals Green Infrastructure Introduction Designing the Frederick County Green Infrastructure Network Implementing the Frederick County Green Infrastructure Network Expanding the Frederick County Green Infrastructure Network Green Infrastructure Policies Land Development Introduction Density Phasing Process Conservation Design Subdivisions Family Division Lots Buffers Health Systems Roads Other Rural Residential Development Conservation Easements Land Development Policies Rural Economy Introduction Rural Economy and the Green Infrastructure Agriculture Forestry Existing Agricultural and Forestal Programs New Agricultural and Forestal Tools Land Stewardship Rural Diversification Equine Industry Rural Tourism and Active Recreation Tuscarora Trail Other Industrial and Mining Activities Rural Economy Policies Rural Community Centers Background Rural Areas Study Rural Community Center Policies -2- DRAFT – 6/6/05 Introduction The rural areas of Frederick County are valued by residents, business owners, employees and visitors primar4jy for their rural character. With a rich inventory of natural, heritage, and agricultural resources, the rural areas have historically defined the physical and cultural landscape of Frederick County and remain a keystone of the County's identity. Preservation of the rural character is the overall goal of this rural areas plan. Background The rural areas of Frederick County consist of all land located outside of the County's designated Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The rural areas comprise the majority of Frederick County's land area and consist of several distinct communities that are home to half of the County's population. Frederick County has been experienced steady overall growth since the 1970's. The rural areas annually capture approximately 30% of all new residential units built in the County, with the remaining 70% developing within the UDA. Just in the last year (2004) this statistic has altered so that the rural areas are capturing 40% of the new residential development with the remaining 60% in the UDA. Some of this trend can be identified as the recent upsurge in new residential construction in the R5 (Residential Recreational Community) Districts, such as Shawneeland and the Summit, which are also considered a part of the rural areas. rufal areas has not ehaRged,—The mal number of new residential lots has risen dramatically, from 137 lots created in the RA (Rural Areas) District in 1999 to 292 lots created in 2004. Much of this growth can be attributed to a thriving economy in Northern Virginia and in the Winchester/Frederick County area itself. Accompanying the growth in residential development since the 1970's has been a decline in agriculture in the County, particularly in the apple industry. Together the decline in agriculture and the increase in residential dwellings have led to a loss of open space, a much valued feature of the rural landscape. Recognition of these trends prompted concern with the impact of new development on rural resources, community services, and the long-standing rural character of Frederick County. In response to such interest, the County conducted a rural areas study in from 2003 ,,�04 through 2005. The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) of the Planning Commission was tasked with undertaking the rural areas study. Public participation was the foundation of the rural areas study process. A variety of formats were used to obtain the input of stakeholders and the general public throughout the process, this included visioning and issue identification meetings, a resident's survey, stakeholder presentations, and general information meetings. In addition a group of large rural landowners 3- DRAFT — 6/6/05 developed an alternate rural areas plan and then worked with the Planning Commission to refine common proposals. The rural areas study was adopted by the Board of Supervisors in (date) of 2005 and now forms part of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Goals The overall goal for the rural areas is to preserve the rural character. This is an imprecise goal, but aspects of rural character have been defined and further goals to clarify the overall goal have been articulated and received wide community support. The goals of the rural areas plan will be to: • Preserve open space. • Protect natural resources. • Protect historic, ar-eheologieal and euice features. • Encourage agriculture and forestry. • Encourage a diverse rural economy that is compatible with the rural character. • Minimize the amount of land used for residential development. • Minimize the impact of development. • Direct residential development to the Urban Development Area (UDA). • Maintain and enhance the Rural Community Centers. Preserve open space Many of the concerns raised during the development of the rural areas study centered on the loss of open space. The County loses its rural character as it loses its open space. Specific strategies have been formulated in this plan to preserve open space. These include requiring open spaee in all new subdivisions increasing the open space set-aside parcels in rural preservation subdivisions, giving incentives, through a rezoning option, for even larger open space set -asides, and encouraging conservation easements Protect natural resources -4- DRAFT - 6/6/0 Another key feature of the rural character is the natural resources of the County. This includes waterways, wetlands and mountains. This plan plaeos at its eary emphasizes the Green Infrastructure, the network of interconnected natural resources. All planning in the rural areas should be based on the Green Infrastructure. The County will encourage developers to take into account natural features not currently protected by current ordinances, such as prime agricultural soils and woodlands, should new be take into aeeeunt when , developments e designed. and work with the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District to encourage effective planning of these resources. Protect historic, features Frederick County contains a wealth of historic, features, few of which are currently protected by ordinances and regulations. This plan encourages the County to investigate placing additional properties on the Virginia Landmarks Register and the National Register of Historic Piaces, so they too can be protected. This Plan includes historic, ..fie„ legie, i and ,,,,1VdF9 fees- properties within the framework of the Green Infrastructure and states that they should be taken into account when new developments are designed. Encourage agriculture and forestry Agriculture and forestry are the activities most associated with the rural areas. While the agriculture industry in particular is undergoing changes, the County should continue to support these activities through the continuation of its agricultural and forestal districts and its land use taxation program. The County should fuAhe actively encourage agriculture and forestry in the open space set -asides of rural residential subdivisions. gffeugh the that all residential provide epei.q. spaee, most of . hi -eh. uld be used for these .,etivities The County should also work with other agencies and commissions to actively promote agriculture and forestry. Encourage a diverse rural economy that is compatible with the rural character The County recognizes that changes in the agricultural industry make it knpessibl difficult for some farmers to continue with their current occupations. In order to encourage land owners to stay on their land and to offer a viable alternate to subdividing and selling land, the County should encourage rural diversification. The chief strategy for implementing this goal should be to review current ordinances to enable a range of uses, such as equestrian activities, specialty farming ventures (i.e. nursery production, small fruit and vegetable production, alternative livestock production, etc.) and tourist accommodation, in the rural areas. Minimize the amount of land used for residential development Large residential subdivisions are not in keeping with the rural landscape. However, the County has sought to maintain current densities to protect the interest of landowners. In -s- DRAFT — 6/6/05 order to maintain current densities while preserving the rural character, the County should increase the required amount of open space in _e�� rural preservation subdivision fflim let S The County should further introduce a rezoning option for residential subdivisions which would have a significantly larger open space requirement and smaller lots sizes. adopt Minimize the impact of development Much Some development in the rural areas is not in keeping with the character of the rural landscape. This includes the physical and visual impacts of development as well as the impact on the County itself to provide facilities and services for this development. The County should seek quality development appropriate to a rural area and should pursue the means for mitigating fiscal and physical impacts. To that end the County should introduce an option to rezone property in the rural area to a new rural residential district. Direct residential development to the Urban Development Area (UDA) The UDA is the appropriate location for urban and suburban development. Through its designation of the UDA boundary, the County commits itself to providing services for this type of development including utilities, improved roads and other urban facilities. Sewer and water lines should not be extended into the rural areas for residential development. Furthermore, lafge subufb denser subdivisions should only be allowed in the rural areas through a rezoning process and they should be required to mitigate all impacts as in the UDA. Maintain and enhance the Rural Community Centers. The Comprehensive Policy Plan identifies eleven Rural Community Centers. A detailed study of each rural community center should be undertaken to examine in greater detail development patterns and trends and to formulate polices for their development. In the interim, small-scale commercial development should be allowed. The residential density in the rural community centers should remain the same as the rest of the Rural Area District, with a rezoning option, if this is appropriate to the character of the Rural Community Center. -6- DRAFT — 6/6/0; Green Infrastructure Introduction The 4 .,mo.,.or-k afound .,,,,ie An important feature of the Rural Areas Plan is based -is the concept of Green Infrastructure. Green Infrastructure is the County's natural life support system - an interconnected network of land and water that supports native species, maintains natural ecological processes, sustains air and water resources and contributes to the health and quality of life for this community and its people. Green Infrastructure encompasses farmland, streambeds, woodlands, parks and scenic views. The Green Infrastructure includes those features which enrich the quality of life and are necessary for the protection of clean air, water, and natural resources, and will serve as the central organizing concept for future land use in the rural areas. The Green Infrastructure concept identifies critical areas for conservation, establishes priorities for protection, and recommends tactics for implementation. It focuses on ecologically important resource areas (woodlands, quality wildlife habitat), higWy productive working landscapes (farmland and forestland) and critical areas for the protection of aquatic resources (wetlands, riparian corridors, floodplains). It can also include culturally important resources such as historic buildings and battlefields, which while not part of the Green Network, are valued by the community and contribute to the overall character of the area. The Green Infrastructure concept has been endorsed by Frederick County for its rural areas. General Green Infrastructure concepts were evaluated and modified locally as part of the County's Rural Area Study in order to reflect this community's values, future vision, and local interests. Designing the Frederick County Green Infrastructure Network In order to design the Frederick County Green Infrastructure Network, desired network attributes were identified and data gathered on their spatial arrangements. Firstly, all land features protected by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance were considered. These included: • floodplains; • lakes and ponds; • wetlands, natural waterways and riparian buffers; • sinkholes; • natural stormwater retention areas; and • steep slopes. These areas warrant the highest level of protection, and are inhereR41y generally unbuildable land unfit for development. These areas are the Primary Conservation Resources of the Frederick County Green Infrastructure Network. -7- DRAFT — 6/6/05 Secondly, other landscape features were evaluated for possible inclusion in the Green Infrastructure Network. These were based on input from the public and stakeholders that was received through the Rural Areas Study process. Suggested features worthy of consideration in the development process include: • Woodlands; • Prime agricultural soil; • Agricultural and forestal districts; • Meadows; • Orchards; • Ridgelines; • Scenic viewsheds (w-hei deme) • Unusual geologic formations; • Existing corridor screening; • Land under conservation easements; • Parks; and • Trails. Land resources such as these should be classified as Secondary Conservation Resources of the Frederick County Green Infrastructure Network. Thirdly, historic features were evaluated for possible inclusion in the Green Infrastructure Network. These were also based oil input 4efn the publie and stakeholders that was in the development rr-vee,.,,,,,o: Historic Properties listed in the Rural Landmarks Survey Report, Frederick County, Virginia, and Civil War Battlefields and Sites (as defined by the National Parks Service Shenandoah Valley Civil War Sites Study), should be classified as Secondary Resources. Secondary conservation resources will not have the same level of protection as primary resources. However, their presence on a site wiR should be a consideration in designing any new developments. Land owners and developers should b q i va to work wi C +, rs to _ nfe hat will be encouraged to protect secondary conservation resources, but this will be done on a voluntary basis. arery esefvea whenever possible. An exception to this will be the historic features designated as secondary -s- DRAFT — 6/6/05 resources. These should be taken into consideration by land owners and developers. Implementing the Frederick County Green Infrastructure Network Based on the elements of the Green Infrastructure accepted by this community, the network was mapped. The Green Infrastructure Map shows the known Frederick County Green Infrastructure. While this map illustrates a community -wide inventory, it will be superseded enhanced by more detailed analyses provided with individual applications. It should be a requirement of all applications for development in the rural areas to identify and map primary conservation resources and seeeadai=y eonsefvatien designated historic resources. Applicants should also be required to consider the primary and seeendary designated historic resources of surrounding properties. Land owners and developers will be encouraged to identify and reap secondary conservation resources, but this will be done on a voluntary basis. It wi1�eextfefnel impeftant r Land owners and developers will be encouraged to work with County planners at an early stage, before costly engineering studies have been undertaken, to determine which portion of a site is appropriate best suited for development. The common goal will be to steer development away from both primary and secondary conservation resources, to maximize an efficient use of the property Over time, as detailed plans showing the primary and secondary resources are submitted with applications, County planners will be able to build a very more detailed map of the County's Green Infrastructure. Development :will be is prohibited in Primary Conservation Areas. This is eensisten v4th by current ordinances. Property owners will continue to get credit towards a site's overall residential density for primary conservation areas, even though they will not be building in those areas. The County will require encourage eonsefvatien design rural preservation subdivisions, instead of traditional five -acre lot subdivisions, for all new residential development in the rural areas. CenseFvatien subdivision design deseribes r-esidefttia4 development in whieh the major-ity of the land is pr-oteeted from developffle w„d ,-.heed „+.,11.. enha-,ee sot .,side par -eel ( of 60 of the a riu vu y viuivanti site)-. In rural preservation subdivisions, the County will require landoAmer-s-to place Beth primary and seean dafy conservation features will- to be placed in the set- aside parcel and will encourage the placement of secondary conservation features in the set-aside parcel. Land owners and developers should have their subdivision plans reviewed by the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District. This review will focus on the plan's conservation of primary resources and the secondary resources identified by the applicant. The District will offer technical -9- DRAFT — 6/6/05 advice to mitigate any negative impacts of development. Applicants will not be required to accept the Soil and Mater Conservation District's advice, and developers of traditional five acre lots may have this review requirement waived by the Planning Department. Expanding the Frederick County Green Infrastructure Network The Frederick County Green Infrastructure will contract and expand as development occurs. Some of the Green Infrastructure, such as farmland, will be lost as houses are built. However, some conservation features of eaeh sites will be saved due to the preservation of 6"0 50% or greater o L site in „f� „had of the se� as=d-e parent tract. The County should adopt other strategies for expanding the Green Infrastructure. This could includes increasing land for parks and trails, both public and private. This could also includes encouraging conservation easements (see the section on land development). The County shcould also consider expanding the Green Infrastructure Network to cover the whole County, including the Urban Development Area (UDA) and shcould encourage the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission to extend the Green Infrastructure Network throughout the region. - lo- DRAFT — 6/6/0 Green Infrastructure Policies Goal - Preserve the rural character Goal - Preserve open space Goal - Protect natural resources Goal - Protect historic, features Strategy 1 — Adopt the Green Infrastructure concept as the framework for maintaining the character of the rural areas and for protecting the natural environment. Strategy 2 — Prohibit development in Primary Conservation Areas. Strategy — Guide development away fte Encourage the protection of Secondary Conservation features. Strategy 4 — Promote a linked network of protected green space. Implementation Measures: Map the primary conservation resources and update as new information is made available. 2. Define in er-dipanees the secondary eenservation features. 3. Map the known secondary conservation resources. 4. Develop a program to identify and map additional information on secondary conservation resources. areas. 6. Review and develop ordinances to promote the Green Infrastructure Network. 7. Review and develop ordinances to prohibit development in the primary conservation areas. 8. Review and develop ordinances to establish a consistent definition of steep slopes. 9. Require detailed information and a map sun,ey of the primary and seeen afy conservation resources with all developments which require a rezoning, master development plan, subdivision design plan, site plan, or preliminary sketch plan. 10. Require information and a map of the designated historic resources with all developments which require a rezoning, master development plan, subdivision design plan, site plan, or preliminary sketch plan. DRAFT — 6/6/05 11. Encourage information and a map of the secondary conservation resources with all developments which require a rezoning, master development plan, subdivision design plan or a site plan. 12. Require a consideration of the primary aiid conservation resources and designated historic resources of the surrounding area with all developments which require a rezoning, master development plan, subdivision design plan, site plan, or preliminary sketch plan. 13. D Rleft-design+�Encourage rural preservation subdivisions. 14. Promote the protection of the Green Infrastructure (beth especially primary aftd sem-resources) as the highest priority in designating the set-aside portion of conservation design subdivisions. + lly ha�a set-aside parcels. 15. Encourage linked �-'r-nor�� 16. Set up an environmental review process of rural subdivisions by the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District. 17. Promote the use of conservation easements and the purchase of development rights to enlarge the Green Infrastructure Network. 18. Seek to expand the Green Infrastructure Network. 19. Establish a trail system linked to the Green Infrastructure Network. 20. Survey County owned land to identify land to be included in the Green Infrastructure network. 21. Commit the County to designating appropriate future County owned land for inclusion in the Green Infrastructure network. 22. Consider expanding the Green Infrastructure Network to cover the whole County, including the Urban Development Area (UDA). 23. Encourage the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission to extend the Green Infrastructure Network throughout the region. 12- DRAFT — 6/6/05 Land Development introduction Residential 'land development ill the rural areas of Frederick County has been sporadic, randomly located and market-driven for many years. The prized landscape of the rural areas has been slashed altered by a succession of free standing large lot residential subdivisions. In recent years, the number of residential lots created has risen dramatically. although The proportion of new rural lots, to overall county lots, has akiedsteady at increased to „ppr-,,ximalely W . almost 40%. New Lots Created Year # of RP lots created # of RA lots created RA lots - % total lots created 1999 310 137 31% 2000 311 235 43% 2001 571 206 27% 2002 536 226 30% 2003 456 226 33% 2004 1 507 292 37% TOTAL 1 2,691 1,322 33% The majority of lots created in the rural areas are scattered throughout the County. In 240-3 2004 for example, 2M 292 rural lots were created in the RA District. 6-9 110 were created in rural preservation lots, where the houses are clustered and 40% of the site remains in a set-aside parcel. X22 lots were created in a major subdivision, a subdivision with four or more traditional five acre lots. The vast majority, 1-5-3 160 lots, were created in minor subdivisions, which include subdivisions resulting in three or fewer traditional five acre lots, family division lots or agricultural lots. The result is that most new residential development is strung out along existing state roads in an unplanned fashion. Residential development in the rural areas has been by -right and new developments have not mitigated their impacts either physically or fiscally. The County has had no control over the timing of this development. The burden has fallen to the County residents in general to supply the roads, schools, fire and rescue services etc that are needed to support the new housing, whenever and wherever it is constructed. One clear goal of the rural areas study undertaken in from 200and 4 through 2005 was to establish a system to better manage the residential growth in the rural areas. Five guiding principles endorsed by the Board of Supervisors in May of 2004 shape the land development policies of the rural areas. These are: • Gross density to average one dwelling per five acres: • Maximize conserved open space; • Preference to cluster new dwellings to conserve rural resources; -13- DRAFT — 6/6/05 • Rezoning process for rural areas to address physical and fiscal impacts and costs; and • Protect and support agriculture via policies and programs. Density The residential density for land in the Rural Areas District (RA) should in general remain at one dwelling per five acres. Density bonuses should be given only in the case of a rezoning, where the impacts of development are mitigated. . The density bonus, possibly as much as 50% of the total number of units, would be given based on standards and criteria to be set out in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, provided the County could cope with the impacts of the increased density. Y. MO By -right Subdivisions Process Two options for by -right rural subdivisions will remain in the RA District — five acre traditional lots and rural preservation subdivisions, which allow for lots as small as two acres and have a mandatory open space set-aside parcel. In order to foster the goal of increasing open space in the rural areas, the open space set-aside parcel in rural preservation subdivisions -14- DRAFT — 6/6/05 should be increased to a minimum of 50%. An additional development right will continue to be allowed for the open space set-aside parcel as a bonus to encourage this type of development. Land owners wishing to subdivide, by -right, rural ane or to,e lots would only be required to submit a sketch plan. Thein lots would e ,,f.+ +,,,,,^,.a a par-er+ +,., c4' b �+ allowanee of 10 lots in any 5 year period. A land owner seeking to develop t1wee er- mefz rural preservation lots would be req ed allowed and encouraged to submit a master development plan (MDP). These rural MDPs would be somewhat similar to a master development plan in the Urban Development Area (UDA). The plan would show the primary and seeen afy conservation features, designated historic properties, secondary conservation features as chosen by the applicant, the location of roads, huf€er-s setbacks, and the general location of houses. A key feature to be shown on the Rural MDPs would be the location of drainfields and well sites. This would insure that the lots could meet health department requirements. While phasing of the houses would be shown, this would be general phasing and would not commit either the property owner or the County to construction of particular houses in designated years. Land owners would be req-uir-ed encouraged to master plan contiguous parcels in common ownership. The main advantage of a rural IVDP for a landowner would be to vest the plan. Rezoning Option Land owners seeking to subdivide to allow more than the by -right allowance of 10 de s i 5 ye one dwelling per five acres, would need to secure a rezoning from the RA District to a new Rural Residential District. This would require approval from the County Board of Supervisors. Rural preservation style development, not five acre lots, would be mandatory. It is envisioned that a density bonus of 25% could be granted if a set-aside parcel of at least 60% of the site were established. It is further envisioned that a density bonus of 50% could be granted if a set-aside parcel of at least 70% of the site were established. In order to accommodate these large set-aside parcels, the minimum lot size in the new Zoning District should be reduced to 30,000 square feet. All requests for rezonings to the new district would require the submission of a rural master development plan and a report analyzing the impacts of the rezoning. Successful rezonings would be required to mitigate the identified impacts. Rezonings would only be granted in cases where the impacts of the development, including the impact on roads and capital facilities, such as schools, were mitigated. it is likely +Rezonings would also include a voluntary phasing plan. In general, rezonings would be allowed in the appropriate rural community centers and near to major roads that could cope with the increased volume of traffic. Criteria for the new Rural Residential District, DRAFT — 6/6/05 including the appropriate locations and design standards, would be established in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. Conservation Design hnftasti-aetufe. As detailed in the seetion on Green Infrastfuettffe, plans v411 need 6E)ntaja details of the pfi iafy id seeondafy consen,afion featufes of the site as well as Conservation subdivision des n will be manda4eFy for- all r-esidenfial develepnwFA-, of the land is,�e4ed frem deyeI&pnwfA-.— it sets standafds for- the quality an eenfigufatkm of the envir-emnepW feattffes to be py-esen, d. it allows the County to + 41uenee r +1,=0_ sig a n of ii-- subdivisions. 1 Gonse+" are identified 2. House sites are loeated 3 Health 1 ems+ systems 4. e+ + d + "1 are aligned a C T + 1" dr- 14 will be er-ifieal for- land ewner-s and develep�,rs to 2wer-k w� County 31anner-s at early stage, before eestly engineering adies have been undefWEen, to deteffnine yA peftion of a site is-apprepFiate--for- development. The eemmen goal �All be to steer - Benefits of eensen,atien design te a developer ifielude r-e"eed inffastfuetffe e..&' 1 + a+o r_+ YY Gonsef�vafiefi subdivisioR design eliminates the five aer-e wokie etA4er- lots in the m ZE),- nhaneed set aside 60,1,6. This �,N4114ead to the assemblage of-gfealff areas,design I:Iexibilit�'- it is, net envisioRed that all iots would be 1 aer-e. There is likely market for many different lot sizes. the festfie-tions on eligible to seek a rezoning ffe-f-ft- the- Boud of SupepAser-,- Set-aside Parcels -16- DRAFT — 6/6/05 It is proposed that uses compatible with a rural setting and not incompatible with rural residential development be encouraged in the set-aside parcels of ,.eRseFvat;o„ design rural preservation subdivisions. These would likely include some types of agriculture, forestry, passive and active recreation and equestrian activities. The County will actively encourage such uses. These uses help to maintain the rural character and will provide affordable land for future farms. Each set-aside parcel will have one additional residential development right, as described above ffem «A4di R the over-all density one dwelling er 5 aere3. In many circumstances it will be an original house on the set-aside parcel. It is not intended that homeowner associations will own the set-aside parcels. This will be possible though, as some uses, such as an equestrian establishment, might lend themselves to a homeowners association. Family Divisions Lots Family division lots should continue to be allowed by -right as per state and local ordinances. foF up -to 4 e new lets. A waiyef shout ber-e for- the +1 r -d subsequefA lats. Family Elivision lots should eepAiR-ue to eaufA towards a paTent tfaet's ovefall density. in keeping with the new pr-apesa4 faf time release subdiv4siens, the feeofdiRg of family lets will eotffA towai-7ds a parent tr-aet's by Y-iglA a4lowanee ef 10 lets ffi any c year -period. The e_ -=b Ofdi1._..will also hereviewed to reKu.fe e.m.rs h:p for- a et period of time to diseour ge abuse of the family division1 +� Setbacks Setbacks should continue to be required as per the existing ordinance along state roads. The Planning Department could be allowed to waive this setback requirement for less than two new houses. Existing setbacks against agricultural land and orchards should be maintained. Setbacks against other non-residential RA uses should be investigated further. Health Systems As stated in the introduction, residential growth in this County is targeted to the Urban Development Area (UDA), where public water and sewer are provided. No water and sewer lines are proposed for residential development in the rural areas. No eammuna4 hoar+h systems are pfoposed in the rufalare Therefore, a14 Health systems lust should be accommodated on individual lots, although easements to nearby lots will be allowed for rural preservation lots. Five -acre traditional lots will be required to accommodate their own health systems and wells on-site. Alternative systems acceptable to the Virginia Department of Health will continue to be acceptable to Frederick County, pr-avided that they a e not l _17_ ■ MM. on We Setbacks Setbacks should continue to be required as per the existing ordinance along state roads. The Planning Department could be allowed to waive this setback requirement for less than two new houses. Existing setbacks against agricultural land and orchards should be maintained. Setbacks against other non-residential RA uses should be investigated further. Health Systems As stated in the introduction, residential growth in this County is targeted to the Urban Development Area (UDA), where public water and sewer are provided. No water and sewer lines are proposed for residential development in the rural areas. No eammuna4 hoar+h systems are pfoposed in the rufalare Therefore, a14 Health systems lust should be accommodated on individual lots, although easements to nearby lots will be allowed for rural preservation lots. Five -acre traditional lots will be required to accommodate their own health systems and wells on-site. Alternative systems acceptable to the Virginia Department of Health will continue to be acceptable to Frederick County, pr-avided that they a e not l _17_ DRAFT — 6/6/45 In order to provide a solution for drainfields that may fail in the future, it is recommended that the amount of land for a reserve drainfield should be increased from the current 50% to 100%. It is also recommended that increased inspection of health systems be investigated. Communal water and sewer facilities may be allowed with rezonings. In all cases these systems should be built to Frederick County Sanitation Authority standards and should be dedicated to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. In the rural community centers, communal water and sewer facilities should include capacity to accommodate existing residences in the center. Roads A14 --Rural subdivision should have public roads that meet County and Virginia Department of Transportation standards and requirements. Up to two new lots will be allowed on an existing state road or on a private road. Construction of a third house would trigger the requirement for a state road. This state road requirement could be waived by the Board of Supervisors, but the road would still need to be constructed to state standards. Curb and gutter wi44 should not be required with rural a4 subdivisions. Sidewalks and streetlights will should not be required with rural resit subdivisions. Underground utilities w41 should be required in eg=o tiofl design the new Rural Residential District. Fencing Fencing against ncn-residential development would be required in new RA and RR subdivisions. This would be fencing that meets Virginia Department of Transpertation Standards. Other Rural Residential Development Not all land outside of the UDA and SWSA is zoned RA. Four sites in the rural area are zoned R5 - Residential Recreational Community District (Lake Holiday, Shawnee -Land, Wilde Acres and Shenandoah). All but Shenandoah have some development, but all four have the potential for further house construction. The R5 communities were developed with an emphasis on recreational and open space uses. All were required to provide environmental protection. While these developments serve a unique demand in the housing market, they effectively allow dense subdivisions in the rural area, contrary to the goals of this plan. No further R5 developments are encouraged. Also within the rural area are six sites zoned MHl - Mobile Home Community District. These small sites are near Gore, Albin, Bethel Grange, Double Tollgate, Armel, and Middletown. While these sites serve a niche in the market, and provide affordable housing, they effectively allow dense residential development in the rural area, contrary to the goals of this plan. No further mobile home communities are ence aged likely in the fcreseeabwe future. is- DRAFT — 6/6/05 Conservation Easements A recurrent theme in the public participation phase of the rural area study is the wish of many rural landowners not to develop their land. Often they want to keep a working farm or preserve a family's property to pass down to future generations. However, due to the changing agricultural economy and personal circumstances, landowners often need to get value out of their land. In order to preserve rural character and discourage further subdivision, the County will encourage landowners to enter into conservation easements to protect rural land. A conservation easement is a simple legal agreement between a landowner and a government agency or a non-profit conservation organization that places permanent limits on the future development of the property in order to protect the conservation value of the land. The easement may also specifically protect natural, scenic or historic features of the property. Conservation easements, while typically donated, can also be purchased by a government agency or a non-profit conservation organization where funding is available. There are currently 10 conservation easements in Frederick County. Nine are held by the Virginia Outdoors Foundation (VOF), a state agency established by the Virginia General Assembly to hold easements in public trust. These include: SITE Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation Chapin, William A. Civil War Preservation Trust Fort Collier Civil War Center, Inc. Kernstown Battlefield Association Kernstown Battlefield Association, Inc. National Trust for Historic Preservation Wells, Harry W. & Mary Louisa Pollard ACREAGE RECORDED 15 06/29/01 135 06/29/01 143 09/13/02 222 11/09/00 10 09/13/02 62 08/28/03 108 03/28/03 183 10/29/02 1,019 11/04/98 At present there is also one riparian easement in Frederick County. A riparian easement permanently restricts uses along a stream to those consistent with protecting water quality. 19.8 acres of land along .91 miles of Brush Creek are protected by a riparian easement. The Brush Creek easement is held by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and the Valley Conservation Council. The voluntary donation of a conservation easement is an excellent method of open space, natural resource and heritage protection. The landowner who donates a conservation easement permanently protects the land, while retaining ownership and enjoyment of the property. There is no public access to conservation easement properties. In many cases the donation of a conservation easement provides substantial federal, state and local tax advantages and estate planning benefits to the landowner. The public benefits through the protection of important natural and cultural resources and scenic vistas. In addition SM DRAFT — 6/6/05 local taxpayers will never have to pay for the expensive public services, such as schools, roads, police, etc. that a new residential development would have demanded. Due to the many benefits of conservation easements, the County should commit itself to the establishment of a Conservation Easement AtAhority Program. This would have he-pewer enable the County to accept voluntary conservation easements and would lso to purchase conservation easements should funding become available. -20- DRAFT — 6/6/05 Land Development Policies Goal - Preserve open space Goal — Protect natural resources Goal — Protect historic, archeological and eultu features Goal — Minimize the amount of land used for residential development Goal - Minimize the impact of development Goal — Direct residential development to the Urban Development Area (UDA) Strategy 1— Base land development regulations on the Green Infrastructure concept Strategy— Require thal. Encourage new developments to be carefully designed around a site's conservation features Strategy 3 — Rhe Encourage eense.=,, ei rural preservation subdivisions. design Strategy 4 - Establish a Rural Residential District designed to preserve greater open space areas. Strategy 5 — Require ' ' ns that developments granted throLEgh a rezoning process #mitigate their physical and fiscal impacts Strategy 7 — Promote the use of conservation easements Implementation Measures: 1. Require information and a sufvey map of primary and seeeftdrfy conservation features and designated historic features with all developments which require a rezoning, master development plan, subdivision design plan, site plan, or sketch plan. -21- DRAFT — 6/6/05 2. Require Encourage a consideration of the secondary conservation features e€ the stiffounding-area with all developments which require a rezoning, master development plan, subdivision design plan, or site plan, er sketeh plan. 3 . Encourage rural preservation subdivisions. 4. Continue to prohibit development on primary conservation features. 5. Review ordinances to establish a consistent definition of steep slopes. 6. Promote the protection of the Green T 4 + t (bot' primary conservation resources) as the highest priority in designating the set-aside portion of eansefvation design rural preservation subdivisions. 7. Establish a 600% eavirenmenta4ly .-chanced minimum 50% set aside parcel in eonseFva+' n deli _ rural preservation subdivisions. 9. Restfiet ftAufe Elevelopffte A on t4e set aside par -eel unless the se4 aside is br-e + the TT h D 1 T DA) at *>1 h F-+ b 13 Y + A (� 9. Allow one extra development right (from the over-all density of 1 unit nacres} to remain with each open space set-aside parcel. 10. Encourage farming and forestry in the set-aside parcel of rural preservation +' n aesign subdivisions. 11. Allow uses in the set-aside parcel of +' design rural preservation subdivisions that are compatible with the sites need for protection and with the maintenance its rural character. lots er-eated in any five year- f 13. Establish a new Rural Residential Zoning District to encourage the preservation of large tracts of open space. b nAy'Aneea r l 0 l+ anyc +; period). e pv 14. Allow a higher density in the new Rural Residential Zoning District 15. Allow lot sizes as small as 30,000 square feet in the new Rural Residential Zoning District 16. Establish standards for the new Rural Residential Zoning District to insure that development is in an appropriate location and mitigates its physical and fiscal impacts and costs. 17. Require a sketch plan for up-to-twe- new RA subdivisions. 18. Require Establish a rural areas master development plan, that would be voluntary, that would provide vesting for the property owner €er subdivisions1 +ha two lets. 19. Encourage master development plans that cover all contiguous parcels within a single ownership. 2 •i. T d ids and [ZI Ih rr �/� - + hC1S 22. Re-examine setbacks between residential RA development and non-residential RA development. 23. Allow off-site drainfield easements only for rural preservation subdivisions. -22- DRAFT — 6/6/05 24. Ivestigate the increased inspection of health systems. 25. Require a 100% reserve drainfield. 26. Allow communal water and sewer facilities with a rezoning. 27. Huiiv u waiver- vi Zvi v,tllvv vi 111v1Yi new I41111 y division Zlots, 28. Require that all new roads in the rural areas be public roads; unless, a waiver is granted. 29. Require fencing against non-residential development in new RA and RR subdivisions. 30. Establish a Conservation Easement Au4herity Program. -23- DRAFT - 6/6/05 Rural Economy Introduction The rural economy of Frederick County plays a significant role in the life and livelihood of its inhabitants. The rural areas are not a mere scenic backdrop for the urban areas, but are a source of jobs and livelihood worth preserving. The rural economy generates a net revenue for the County. The taxes paid by a low dens �., an agricultural economy exceed the cost of services provided. A thriving rural economy is a critical component of the future vision for the rural areas. Rural Economy and the Green Infrastructure The vast majority of the land in the rural areas is in agricultural or forestry use. Agriculture and forestry have a greater role than a purely economic one. Agriculture provides much more than food. Forests provide much more than timber. These lands also supplypr-aduetsvitjitt4e market-va4ue, have great cultural and environmental importance, that ineluding and provide open space, wildlife habitats, clean air and water, flood control, groundwater recharge, scenic views and cultural heritage. Farms and forests give Frederick County its rural character. Agricultural and forest land account for the majority of the county's Green Infrastructure. The farms and forests are the largest pieces of land which hold together the county's natural ecosystem. Protection of the County's rural economy - especially through preservation of farms and forests - achieves conservation of the County's Green Infrastructure and its rural character. Agriculture Agriculture has historically served as the foundation of Frederick County's rural economy. In particular, Frederick County is associated with the apple industry and its various support services. Howevef, Agricultural activities occur on both a large and small scale in the rural areas, with open land devoted not only to orchards, but also to hay production, cattle grazing, and crop cultivation. The central role of agriculture to the rural economy translated into the land use patterns that shaped the rural landscape traditionally associated with Frederick County. The County contains large areas of prime agricultural soil. The 1982 Soil Survey of Frederick County prepared by the Soil Conservation Service of the US Department of Agriculture classified all soils and designated some as prime farmland. The largest concentration of prime agricultural soil is in a band approximately five miles wide, running north to south, west of Interstate 81 (see map). Over the past 20 years the agriculture industry has undergone great change. This change has been driven by many factors, not the least of which is an increasingly competitive -24- DRAFT — 6/6/05 global market. In Frederick County, this period of transition has been accompanied by a decline in large scale farming operations, as well as diminishing farm profits. The table below shows general farm characteristics for Frederick County. Overall both the number of farms and the number of acres in farmland have increased since 1987. However, these figures should be treated cautiously as the Census of Agriculture's definition of a farm changed in 1997 and the census methodology changed in 2002. Many small farms have since been included. Inclusion of these small farms is also a factor in lowering the average size of a local farm, identified as 156 acres in 2002. Farm Characteristics Source: U.S. Census of Agriculture 1987, 1992, 1997, 2002 A further breakdown of farm sizes is contained in the table below. This shows the clear increase in number of small farms, especially those under 50 acres and the decrease in large farms of 500 - 999 acres. Number of Farms by Farm Size Farm Characteristics year 1987 1992 1997 2002 Percent Change Change from 1987- 1987 - 2002 2002 Number of Farms 555 536 568 720 165 30% Farmland (Acres) 111,116 98,142 99,926 112,675 1,559 1% Avg. Farm Size (Acres) 200 183 178 156 -44 -22% Source: U.S. Census of Agriculture 1987, 1992, 1997, 2002 A further breakdown of farm sizes is contained in the table below. This shows the clear increase in number of small farms, especially those under 50 acres and the decrease in large farms of 500 - 999 acres. Number of Farms by Farm Size Source: U.S. Census of Agriculture 1987, 1992, 1997, 2002 Frederick County has long been associated with the apple industry and its various support services. However, all indicators point to a significant decline in apple growing locally. The number of acres in apple trees has declined 13% in the last 15 years (see table below), with the largest decline occurring in the last five years. Further, the amount of apples produced has fallen from 162,586,000 pounds in 1987 to 111,452,000 pounds in -25- Number of Farms by Farm Size Year 1987 1992 1997 2002 Change from 1987-2002 Percent Change 1987-2002 1 - 9 Acres 28 31 30 51 23 82% 10 — 49 Acres 141 147 146 231 90 64% 50 - 179 Acres 198 202 227 260 62 31% 180 - 499 Acres 137 106 120 138 1 <1% 500 - 999 Acres 40 37 35 -Jo, 28 -12 -30% 1000+ Acres 11 13 12 1 9% Source: U.S. Census of Agriculture 1987, 1992, 1997, 2002 Frederick County has long been associated with the apple industry and its various support services. However, all indicators point to a significant decline in apple growing locally. The number of acres in apple trees has declined 13% in the last 15 years (see table below), with the largest decline occurring in the last five years. Further, the amount of apples produced has fallen from 162,586,000 pounds in 1987 to 111,452,000 pounds in -25- DRAFT — 6/6/05 2002, a decline of 31%. Despite this decline, Frederick County retains its position as the number one apple producing county in Virginia. Frederick County also leads the state in peach production. However, the number of acres of peach orchards declined from 777 acres in 1987 to 414 acres in 2002, a decline of 47%. Characteristics of Agriculture Source: U.S. Census of Agriculture 1987, 1992, 1997, 2002, Virginia Agricultural Statistics Service Countering the decline in acreage for orchards has been the increase in land in forage, principally hay. The number of acres of forage grew by 38% between 1987 and 2002. The dry tonnage of forage produced increased by a similar percentage. Nursery and green house sales have also risen dramatically in the last five years, but they remain a small part of the county's agricultural sector. Employment in agriculture also ,.,Aron es to has been decreasirge. The 1990 U.S. Census listed 663 workers in farming, forestry and fisheries occupations. In 2000, 378 people were working in farming, forestry and fisheries occupations. These numbers do not include those employed in farm related occupations such as food processing and sales. Employment in agriculture is likely to drop further as the average age of a Virginia farmer is now 56.7 years. The decline of the local orchard industry and diminished profits in agriculture overall suggest that the agricultural industry in Frederick County is in a significant period of transition. While the county should continue to promote and protect agriculture, alternative markets and alternative crops must be explored. In addition commercial alternatives to agriculture must be examined for those unable to continue with traditional farming. -26- Characteristics of Agriculture(Products) Year 1987 1992 1997 2002 Change from 1987-2002 Percent Change 1987-2002 Cattle and Calves (Units) 17,799 19,078 18,234 20,113 2,314 13% Corn (Acres) 2,762 2,644 3,053 3,254 492 18% Forage (Acres) 18,458 20,030 19,665 25,530 7,072 38% Orchards (Acres) 9,459 9,743 9,670 7,902 -1557 -16%— Apple Orchards (Acres) 8,602 9,068 9,017 7,442 -1160 -13% Peach Orchards (Acres) Apple Production (1000 Pounds) 777 162,586 615 150,985 607 112,354 414 111,452 -363 -47% 51,134 -31% Source: U.S. Census of Agriculture 1987, 1992, 1997, 2002, Virginia Agricultural Statistics Service Countering the decline in acreage for orchards has been the increase in land in forage, principally hay. The number of acres of forage grew by 38% between 1987 and 2002. The dry tonnage of forage produced increased by a similar percentage. Nursery and green house sales have also risen dramatically in the last five years, but they remain a small part of the county's agricultural sector. Employment in agriculture also ,.,Aron es to has been decreasirge. The 1990 U.S. Census listed 663 workers in farming, forestry and fisheries occupations. In 2000, 378 people were working in farming, forestry and fisheries occupations. These numbers do not include those employed in farm related occupations such as food processing and sales. Employment in agriculture is likely to drop further as the average age of a Virginia farmer is now 56.7 years. The decline of the local orchard industry and diminished profits in agriculture overall suggest that the agricultural industry in Frederick County is in a significant period of transition. While the county should continue to promote and protect agriculture, alternative markets and alternative crops must be explored. In addition commercial alternatives to agriculture must be examined for those unable to continue with traditional farming. -26- DRAFT — 6%6!05 Forestry Forest land accounts for approximately 56% of the total land in Frederick County. The latest estimate (2001 Virginia Forest Survey) of forest land for the County is 151,543 acres. This is a 17% increase from the 1992 figure of 129,262 acres. The vast majority of forest land in the County is in private ownership. The George Washington National Forest accounts for 4,431 acres of the County's forest land. The dominant forest type in the County is Oak -hickory (75% of all acreage) with some Oak -pine as well (19%). Frederick County's average annual timber harvest value between 1986 and 2001 was $458,853. This places the county 81St among the 98 counties in Virginia. Despite its vast forests, Frederick County is not a major force in the Virginia timber industry. While detailed information for Frederick County is not available, throughout Virginia there is an increasing parcelization of forested land. Small parcels and proximity to houses make commercial forest management more difficult. With the advent of the Forest Stewardship Program in 1978, private landowners have been encouraged to develop a written management plan. These plans are comprehensive, multi -resource management plans that can cover timber, wildlife habitat, watershed protection and recreational opportunities. Throughout the state of Virginia only 17 percent of private forest -land owners have a written management plan. These are generally owners of large (500+ acres) forests. Much more could be done in Frederick County to both encourage comprehensive forest management and increase timber yields. Existing Agricultural and Forestal Programs Frederick County has long been supportive of agriculture and forestry and actively encourages and promotes these uses. Two key programs are described below. 1. Agricultural and Forestal Districts Agricultural and forestal districts are rural areas reserved for the production of agricultural products and timber. A district constitutes a voluntary agreement between landowners and the County that no new, non-agricultural uses will take place in the district. However, an agricultural and forestal district is not a zoning district. From the landowner's point of view, the district provides 1) strength in numbers with neighboring farmers; 2) land use taxation; 3) protection from nuisance suits 4) assurance that the district will be taken into account in local planning decisions, such as rezonings; and 5) protection in most cases from government acquisition of land or special assessments for public utilities. _27_ DRAFT — 6/6/65 Landowners agree not to subdivide their land to a more intensive non-agricultural use during the term of the district. The County agrees to shield the district from development pressure. There are tluee two agricultural and forestal districts in Frederick County — South Frederick (1 259) ae � and Double Church (see map) (1,5 2 aen' and Reftige (472 1 ) All three etc. dist- _afe fa i 2005 Participation in the districts has declined significantly since 2000. Agricultural and forestal districts currently do not offer enough incentives for many participants to continue. Further benefits could encourage greater and more prolonged participation. 2. Land Use Tax Deferral Frederick County has adopted a land use tax deferral program. Taxpayers owning and operating qualifying agricultural, horticultural and forestry uses are eligible for a special annual deferment of real estate taxes on the property. The land is assessed at its value for agriculture, horticultural or forestry, instead of at its full fair market value, which is generally higher. This ensures that owners of farms, orchards, and forests do not find it necessary to sell their land because they can not pay real estate taxes based upon market rate assessments. When property is removed from land use, due to a change in use, roll -back taxes are applied for the current and preceding five (5) years plus interest. New Agricultural and Forestal Tools In addition to continuing its existing programs, the County should promote additional tools for protecting farmland. These will also benefit forest lands. 1. Gensen,afionA)esien Rural Subdivision Set -Asides The eensen,afion design rural preservation subdivisions detailed in the section on land development require that 6"0 50% of the land in these subdivisions be set aside ffv as open space. Even greater set -asides will result with rezonings. This open space set-aside will be promoted for agricultural or forestry use compatible with the adjacent residential properties. The exclusion of such uses in the deeds and covenants recorded with approved rural subdivisions should be discouraged. 2. Conservation Easements/Purchase of Development Rights A conservation easement is a legal agreement between a landowner and a government agency or a non-profit conservation organization that places permanent limits on the future development of the property in order to protect the conservation value of the land. Grantors generally retain the right to use their land for farming or similar purposes. They continue to hold title to their property and may restrict public access -28- DRAFT — 6/6/05 and sell their property. A more detailed description of easements in contained in the section on land development. In the past landowners in Frederick County have had to look elsewhere for organizations willing to hold conservation easements or purchase development rights. It is a proposal of this plan to establish a Frederick County Conservation Easement AtAhefi Program to enable the County to hold voluntary easements and to purchase development rights. Land Stewardship Agricultural and forestry uses provide many benefits to the natural environment including flood control and groundwater recharge. However, some practices, such as draining wetlands or farming highly erodable land, can have negative impacts on the environment. The County will encourage environmentally sound farm and forest management practices. Financial or "cost share" assistance is available to private landowners for many management activities. Most federal programs are administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS), Farm Services Agency (FSA), and Soil & Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs). Major programs include the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP). The primary goal of these programs is to preserve wetlands and water quality, prevent soil erosion, and improve wildlife habitat through the adoption of Best Management Practices and conversion of sensitive agricultural lands to streamside or riparian buffers. State programs are administered by the Virginia Department of Forestry (DOF) and include the Forest Land Enhancement Program (FLEP) and Reforestation of Timberlands (RT). The primary goal of both programs is the reforestation of harvested lands. In 2002 the Virginia General Assembly enacted a Riparian Buffer Tax Credit which provides tax credits for owners of timberlands which abut a waterway. The County will work with the Virginia Extension Service to promote good stewardship and conservation practices of all rural land and to publicize programs and funds to aid land conservation. Rural Diversification Despite the County's best efforts to protect and promote agriculture, the health of the agriculture industry is largely dependent on factors well beyond the control of the County. These factors include foreign competition, availability of labor, government regulations, fuel prices and interest rates. In light of the changing face of agriculture, the County will complement its continued support of agriculture and forestry with greater opportunities for diversification. I►Ii DRAFT — 6/6/05 Economic activity which is compatible with agriculture will be encouraged and promoted in the rural areas. Any activity must be compatible in terms of scale, use and intensity with the rural environment. Activities such as small hotels and horse stable can play a valuable role in providing a balanced rural economy. Land based tourism and recreation particularly lend themselves to the rural environment, but their very success is contingent on the maintenance of the rural character. However, rural diversification should ideally complement agriculture and should not be allowed to prejudice agricultural activities. The County commits itself to the creation of a Rural Economy Task Force to further study economic diversification. This task force will draw members from the local farm community, local businesses, the Winchester Frederick County Economic Development Commission and the Chamber of Commerce. The task force will examine in greater detail the existing rural economy and explore alternatives to insure a vibrant rural economy. One task force undertaking should be to provide input to the Planning Commission in a review of ordinances to enable rural diversification. The County will encourage, not impede, appropriate economic development. Such appropriate development may be allowed by -right or with a conditional use permit, subject to meeting performance standards including traffic capacity limits, employee limits and site design standards. The County should make the rural economy a significant focus of the Winchester Frederick County Economic Development Commission, Equine Industry Virginia is the 5th largest equine state in the U.S. The equine industry is Virginia is centered in the Northern Region, which includes Frederick County, but is largely based in Loudoun and Fauquier Counties. To date Frederick County has not been a major force in the equine industry. Trail riding and pleasure are the largest equine uses in Virginia. Breeding, competition/shows and racing are far behind. With the strength and growth of the equine industry in the northern region of Virginia and the dominance of small, recreational facilities, Frederick County could take on a greater role in the Virginia equine industry. A first step is to review current ordinances to allow additional equine related activities in the rural areas. Rural Tourism and Active Recreation Tourism is a growing industry in Virginia, expanding more than 47% from 1994 through 2002. According to the Virginia Tourism Corporation (VTC), tourism is the third largest employer in Virginia behind business services and health services. Frederick County's share of the Virginia tourism industry is small but growing. The VTC estimates that travel employment in Frederick County grew from 520 in 1993 to 778 in 2001 and that travel spending in the County grew from $31,690,000 in 1993 to $52,142,570. -30- DRAFT — 6/6/05 While it is not possible to separate the rural tourism figures from the County figures, it is possible to conclude that with the continued growth in the tourism industry, there is scope for additional tourism related development in the rural areas. Some forms of tourism particularly lend themselves to rural areas. These include scenic drives, hiking, wildlife observation, equestrian activities; mountain biking, cas„ps and bed and breakfast accommodation, to name just a few. The County could take a stronger lead in promoting tourism and recreation activities in the rural areas. A first step is to review current ordinances to allow additional tourism related activities in the rural areas. The local tourism industry is strongly base.? ^rotin linked to the County's rich historic and cultural resources. The County should continue its protection of these resources and investigate placing further properties on the state and national registers of historic places. desigirate t# P}i3--as-8c-co irdai-y evirs-ex=t=aire7it-caourccs-within - the fiumewoi4E of the Green trueIn particular the County should continue to promote and preserve its Civil War Battlefields (see chapter on History). The County should also work with the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission in developing its Walking and Wheeling program that links communities and historic, recreational, and scenic areas via roads and trails. Tuscarora Trail The Tuscarora Trail is a 249 mile hiking trail situated generally along the mountain ranges to the west of the Shenandoah and Cumberland Valley. It connects to the Appalachian Trail in Shenandoah National Part; and in Pennsylvania northeast of Carlisle. Approximately 26 miles of the Tuscarora Trail is in Frederick County (see map). Of this total, approximately 11.25 trail miles are protected by easements on private property, 3.75 trail miles are on unprotected private property and 11 trail miles are on public roads. This trail is an important feature in the county for recreation and for the promotion of tourism. For safety reasons, the County supports the relocation of the trail off of the public roads wherever possible. The County supports voluntary trail easements for sections of the trail on private property to insure the long-term viability of the Tuscarora Trail and also encourages conservation easements that protect viewsheds from the Tuscarora Trail. Other Industrial and Mining Activities There are some industrial and mineral extraction sites in the rural areas unrelated to agriculture or forestry. These sites include the many quarries, Bluestone Industrial Park and isolated industrial sites. In keeping with the a id „g r''ple of this > y> + o promote agrieultufe and fores+rt, and —mwdzP- open -31- DRAFT — 6/6/05 pfoposed for- these other- in"s4ia4 and miiaer-al extraetion sites and no new large sites are pr-apesed-. Isolated requests for new industrial sites will likely not be supported. The County may however, in the future, designate additional locations for industrial uses as part of a comprehensive planning effort. Under such a scenario, existing rural areas land might be planned for industrial development. -32- DRAFT — 6/6/05 Economy Policies Goal: Encourage agriculture and forestry Goal: Encourage a diverse rural economy that is compatible with the rural character Goal: Minimize the impact of development Strategy — Protect agricultural land and promote the local agricultural industry Strategy 2 — Protect forest land and promote healthy, sustainable forest resources. Strategy — Allow economic activities compatible with a rural setting. Strategy 4 — Encourage good stewardship and conservation practices on all rural land. Strategy — Promote the use of conservation easements. Implementation Methods: I. Review ordinances to enable theftAl a greater range of agricultural and forestry related activities in the rural areas. 2. Allow and encourage agricultural and forestry uses within the lie aro set aside portion of ec„seFvatio design rural subdivisions. 3. Designate prime agr-ieuhufal soil and woodlands as seeendar-5, eensef-vation r-eseuTees. 4. Engage the Winchester Frederick County Economic Development Commission and the Winchester Frederick County Chamber of Commerce to proactively promote agriculture as an important element of the local economy. Specifically, these organizations should coordinate. community education initiatives and industry and market research, as well as strategic marketing and small business development in support of local agriculturalists. 5. Encourage the expansion of existing agricultural and forestal districts and the creation of additional districts. 6. Protect land located within agricultural and forestal districts from encroachment by suburban and urban land uses. Discourage expansion of the Urban Development Area (UDA) to include land adjacent to an existing agricultural and forestal district. 7. Investigate and adopt measures to increase the value of joining and remaining in an agricultural and forestal district, such as priority treatment in any future purchase of conservation easement/development rights program and enhanced tax benefits and/or relief. 8. Work with the Virginia Tech Agricultural Research Center in Frederick County to develop relationships and programs that benefit the local agricultural community. -33- DRAFT — 6/6/95 9. Work with the Virginia Horse Industry Board to promote the development of the equine industry in Frederick County. 10. Retain land use taxation. 11. Establish a Rural Economy Task Force to further study economic diversification. 12. Review ordinances to allow appropriate commercial, industrial, employment and institutional uses in the Rural Area to diversify the rural economy. 13. Coordinate with the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission to establish a Walking and Wheeling program that links communities and historic, recreational, and scenic areas via roads and rails. 14. Encourage voluntary trail easements for properties along the Tuscarora Trail, and also encourage conservation easements that protect viewsheds from the Tuscarora Trail. 15. Establish a Conservation Easement AtAofity Program and investigate funding sources for a Purchase of Development Rights Program. 16. Promote forest management plans. 17. Promote state and federal programs that provide financial and technical assistance for the conservation of natural resources and the encouragement of wildlife habitats. 18. Work with the Virginia Extension Service to promote good stewardship and conservation practices of all rural land. -34- DRAFT — 6/6/05 Rural Community Centers Background Rural community centers are small activity nodes or small centers of residential development in the rural areas of Frederick County. They are settlements that preceded the steady residential growth in the rural areas that began in the 1970's. Some have historical buildings and historical connections. The 1976 Frederick County Comprehensive Plan designated a number of population centers as "Development Areas". The 1982 Comprehensive Plan refined these into Rural Community Centers. 13 Rural Community Centers, including the towns of Stephens City and Middletown, were designated, and the 1982 Plan recommended detailed studies of each center to take account of unique characteristics. From 1984 to 1985 a study of the Rural Community Centers, which included a series of public meetings, took place. Among the issues studied at that time were residential development, commercial development, housing density, mobile homes and public services, particularly the provision of public water and sewer. The 1984/85 study led to the formulation of rural community centers policies in the 1989 Comprehensive Plan. 11 Rural Community Centers were identified in the 1989 Plan. The current Comprehensive Policy Plan identifies these same eleven Rural Community Centers. They are shown on the map below. These are: Gore Reynolds Store Gainsboro Round Hill Armel Shawneeland/North Mountain Star Tannery Whitacre/Cross Junction Albin ClearbrookBrucetown Stephenson Five Rural Community Centers (Gore, Gainsboro, ClearbrookBrucetown, Stephenson and Round Hill) have identified boundaries on the Current Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The other six are identified only by circles on the map. To date a detailed plan has been prepared only for the Round Hill Community Center. It now forms part of the adopted Comprehensive Policy Plan. Rural Areas Study The rural areas study in 2003-2004 examined the development patterns and roles of the eleven rural community centers. The rural community centers have very different sizes and functions. It is recommended that a detailed study of each rural community center be undertaken to examine in greater detail development patterns and trends and to formulate polices for development. The studies should examine both land uses and design issues. Particular attention should be given to historic buildings and structures as these often give the centers much of their character. Health systems will also need to be examined in detail. The studies and any resulting policies should be developed with the close cooperation of the residents of those centers. -35- DRAFT — 6/6/0 These studies may take years to complete and an interim set of general policies for all of the rural community centers needed to be developed. The general policies were based on an assessment of each center (see below). Commercial development that is of a use, scale and intens i y that is consistent .Viffh the rect of thee center will be encouraged. Until detailed studies are completed, residential density v411 should in general remain the same as the rest of the Rural Areas (RA) District. However, because the rural community centers have established population centers, five acre lots and rural preservation lots should not be allowed in these centers without a waiver from the Board of Supervisors. Instead, rezonings should be encouraged in those rural community centers as detailed below. Rezonings allow for smaller lots, which are often consistent with those found in the rural community centers. In addition, rezonings allow for communal water and sewer systems which could be of great benefit to existing residents in these centers. Reynolds Store, Shawneeland/North Mountain and Whitacre/Cross Junction function as commercial nodes. Each serves a large, dispersed catchment area. It is proposed that these rural community centers remain very small commercial nodes. Some new commercial development, particularly development that serves the needs of the catchment area, such as a retail store or a restaurant, would be appropriate. It is recommended that boundaries be designated in the detailed studies to remove any doubt that commercial development is appropriate only in a small area. Additional residential development is not proposed for these three areas. Star Tannery is a small crossroads serving a catchment population in the far southwest corner of the County. It is proposed that Star Tannery remain a small commercial node with some increase in commercial uses to serve the surrounding population. Star Tannery will likely come under further development pressure in the future as the Corridor H (Route 55) widening takes place in West Virginia. Residential development in this rural community center is very low density and no intensification of residential development, through a rezoning, is proposed. Albin is primarily a residential community with commercial nodes at the north and south entrances. Additional commercial development to serve the surrounding population could be accommodated in Albin. A detailed study of Albin would determine whether commercial development should be confined to the two existing commercial areas or be interspersed throughout the Albin rural community center. The study should also recommend boundaries for the center and examine residential densities. Armel is also a residential enclave with a small commercial node. Additional commercial establishments could be accommodated in this area to serve the local population. The nearby Shenandoah Community may, when developed, generate a larger market for commercial uses in Armel. The remainder of the rural community center is residential. The Eastgate Industrial Park is located near the Armel rural community -36- DRAFT — 6/6/05 center. However, it does not function as part of the center and should not be included within the center boundaries. A detailed study of Armel should designate center boundaries, identify appropriate areas for modest commercial development, and examine in detail residential density. Gore is one of the oldest settlements in Frederick County. It is now largely a residential community but contains some non-residential uses. Additional commercial establishments could be accommodated in this area to serve the local population. A detailed study of Gore should re-examine the center's boundaries and identify areas for appropriate commercial development and denser residential development. Gainsboro is a rural community center with a dispersed population. It is largely residential, but with a less dense pattern of development than some of the other rural community centers. Gainsboro has a small cluster of non-residential uses. Additional commercial establishments could be accommodated in this area to serve the local population. A detailed study of Gainsboro should re-examine the center's boundaries and identify areas for appropriate commercial development and possibly denser residential development. Clearbrook/Brucetown is within the area covered by the Northeast Land Use Plan. Clearbrook/Brucetown has a variety of commercial and residential components. The Clearbrook area, along route 11 is included in the Sewer and Water Services Area (SWSA) and contains many commercial and industrial facilities along with residences. The Brucetown area is a more traditional rural center with a few commercial facilities and a clustering of older residences. A detailed study of ClearbrookBrucetown should re-examine the center's boundaries and identify areas for appropriate commercial development, which might actually be different for the two areas. It should also explore residential densities in greater detail. Stephenson is a rural community center in transition. A significant portion of the rural community center is now part of the Urban Development Area (UDA). This allows for connection to county sewer and water lines. Most of the rural community center is within the Sewer and Water Services Area (SWSA). Sewer and water service is available to commercial and industrial sites and existing houses within the SWSA. The rezoning of Stephenson Village from the RA District to the R4 (Residential Planned Community) District will greatly impact the Stephenson rural community center. Due to the many changes affecting the Stephenson area, a detailed study of this rural community center is vital. Prior to a detailed study of the Stephenson rural community center, the interim policies for all rural community centers will be relevant. A detailed study of the Round Hill rural community center was adopted in 1996 and is included within this rural areas plan. Due to recent changes in the Round Hill area however, a new study of Round Hill may be necessary in the future. The goals, strategies and policies in this section will apply to all rural community centers, with the exception of Round Hill which already has a detailed plan. -37- KRAFT — 6/6/05 Rural Community Center Policies The Rural Community Center policies apply to all centers except Round Hill, which already has a detailed plan incorporated into the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Goal: Maintain and enhance the Rural Community Centers. Strategy l Encourage commercial development in the Rural Community Centers that is of a use, scale and intensity that is consistent with the rest of the center. Strategy 2 Prevent the Rural Community Centers from becoming high growth areas. Strategy 2 Allow residential development ut the same Elms, � as with the rest of the Rural Areas (RA) District. Strategy 3 Allow educational and governmental uses that are of a suitable use, scale and intensity. Strategy 4 Prepare detailed studies of each rural community center Implementation Measures: 1. Allow commercial development that serves the local area and is compatible in use, scale and character to the rural community center. 2. Require r-esidential development to mee4 the RA Distfiet residential standafds. 3. ,Allow five acre traditional lots and rural preservation subdivisions only with a waiver from the Board of Supervisors. 4. Encourage rezonings in the rural community centers. 5. Encourage the clustered houses associated with any rezoning to be located near existing residences. C. Encourage rezonings to provide communal water and sewer facilities that benefit the wider rural community center. 7. Consider educational and governmental uses on a case by case basis 8. Prepare a detailed study for each rural community center 9. Secure the cooperation of local residents in developing policies for each center 10. Establish design guidelines for each center 11. Promote the retention and re -use of historic structures 12. Develop boundaries for centers that are currently only noted by a circle on the land use map 13. Review those center boundaries already delineated on the land use map 14. Consider overlay districts to guide development in individual centers -38- DRAFT — 6/6/05 15. Consider ordinance changes to allow a higher residential density 16. Consider ordinance changes to promote small scale commercial development -39- RU 4,L PRESERVATION DIRECTION CHART Revised 4/18/2005 Five Acre 100 Acre Rural 100 Acre By -Right Max Preservation Max M' ',num Lot Size 5 acres 2 acres Density 1 in 5 acres 20 1 in 5 acres plus 1 Set Aside 50% N/A Yes 21 Set Aside 60% N/A N/A Set Aside 70% N1 N/A Phasing No Yes (Negotiated) Green Infrastructure Primary Yes Yes Secondary -Voluntary No Yes Public Streets Without Waiver Yes Yes With Waiver No No Environmental Review Without Waiver Yes Yes With Waiver (Staff) No N/A Transportation Review Without Waiver Yes (3 or more) Yes (3 or more) With Waiver (Staff) No (2 or less) No (2 or less) R. .ew of Historic Sites (formally identified only) Yes Yes Community Water/Sewer No No Off -Site Drainfield No Yes Set Backs (State Roads and . Non -Residential R.A.) Without Waiver Yes (3 or more) (b) Yes (b) With Waiver (Staff) No (2 or less) N/A Fencing Against Non -Residential R.A. (V -Dot Specs) Yes Yes Approvals Plat/Sketck (Staff) MDP Process Proffers No Allowed within Defined Community Center Without Waiver No With Waiver Yes Fa,,.,ly Varience Lots (a) (a) Per State Code and/or Local Ordinance (b) Requires Existing Set Back Ordinance Adjustments Mm No Yes (a) Rezoning 30,000 sq. ft. Various Yes 750/ RAnI ps 50% Bonus Yes (Negotiated) Yes Yes Yes No Yes N/A Yes (All) N/A Yes Optional Yes Yes (b) N/A Yes Rezoning & MDP Yes Yes N/A (a) 100 Acre Max. 21 25 30