CPPC 08-11-03 Meeting AgendaTO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
MEMORANDUM
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee
Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Planning Director
August Meeting and Agenda
Augustl, 2003
FAX: 540/665-6395
The Frederick County Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) will be meeting
on Monday, August 11, 2003, at 7:30 p.m. in the first floor conference room of the County
Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. The CPPS will discuss the
following agenda items:
AGENDA
1) Rural Areas Study,
3) Other.
Please contact our department if you are unable to attend this meeting. Thank you.
Access to the County Administration Building for night meetings that do not occur in the Board
room will be limited to the back door of the four-story wing. I would encourage committee
members to park in the countyparking 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. The door will
be locked; therefore, please wait for staff to open the door.
File Copy
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
ITEM #1
Rural Areas Study
As discussed during the July meeting, the committee will be dedicated for the foreseeable future to
completion of the Rural Areas Study, the product of which will be a recommended Rural Areas
Policy Plan. The importance of this exercise to the future of Frederick County cannot be
overemphasized, a fact reflected by the Board of Supervisors' direction that prioritized its
completion at the top of the Planning Department's long-range planning program. Indeed, the rural
areas comprise the majority of land in Frederick County and consist of several distinct communities
that are home to fully half of the County's population. Moreover, the identity of Frederick County
is inextricably linked to the rural areas' rich inventory ofnatural, heritage, and agricultural resources.
As an important initial step, the committee will discuss and establish the scope of the planning
process for the rural areas. Moreover, the committee will consider the myriad stakeholders in the
process and establish a strategy for ensuring sufficient opportunities for community involvement in
plan development. The outcome of these discussions will be used by staff to produce a detailed
process outline, to include a public participation plan, which will serve as the foundation for the
committee's plan -making efforts.
A draft overview of the rural areas planning process as envisioned by staff has been prepared as a
starting point for committee deliberations. This document has been attached for your reference.
Rural Areas Study
Draft Process Outline
July 31, 2003
Phase I: Establishing the Vision, Defining the Problem
Review rural land use data. Develop shared understanding of rural development trends in Countywide
context. Establish consensus regarding the "realities" of rural land use patterns and identify implications of
maintaining the status quo. Articulate vision for Rural Areas Study.
Based upon study vision, confirm scope of study process and provide final endorsement of a project
schedule. Agree upon ground rules for committee deliberations and roles of member and staff in the process.
Operationalize public participation plan reflecting established scope and schedule.
Based upon the consensus of the committee, problem identification (issues and opportunities) will occur
either through further committee deliberations or outreach to the general public. These are two distinct
options, the desirability of which will depend upon the committee's comfort with public input received
through past rural planning use exercises.
Option 1: Assess current popular sentiment concerning "the good, the bad, and the ugly" in the
County's rural areas. Accomplish via series of community workshops intended to j ump start
the planning process. This option provides the benefit of validating the process and
resulting policy recommendations through early public involvement. Indeed, the application
of such a "bottom - up" approach would clarify that the rural areas plan is intended to
develop as an expression of the community. Workshops are envisioned to build upon the
AOC model in terms of number of events and locations. The committee would analyze
results of the workshops and define objectives by distinct policy area (i.e. subdivision
design, transportation, environment, etc.).
Tentative Time Frame - Option 1: Public Workshops - late September and/or mid November 2003
CPPS Problem Identification - September/October 2003
CPPS Analysis of Public Input - November/December 2003
Definition of Policy Objectives - January/February 2004
Option 2: Commence process with committee establishing process objectives and policy alternatives,
relying upon collective knowledge and public input gathered through prior rural planning
exercises. This approach would forego direct public involvement in the initial phase of the
process. The committee, with its enhanced citizen membership, would assume a more direct
representative role on behalf of the rural community with this option, identifying the
fundamental issues and opportunities requiring policy intervention. The benefit of this
approach would be a limited "pre -planning" phase thereby enabling the committee to more
expeditiously commence policy formulation. Through this option, the committee will both
identify issues relevant to the rural areas and define the study's policy objectives.
Tentative Time Frame - Option 2: CPPS Problem Identification - September/October 2003
Definition of Policy Obiectives - November/December 2003.
Phase H: Realizing the Vision, Articulating the Solution
Entering this phase, policy objectives have been defined based upon problem identification exercises
conducted either exclusively by the committee or through a process involving public workshops. The
committee would then proceed to generate policy alternatives to address identified objectives. Such policy
development would proceed systematically, with the committee considering responses to objectives
organized by policy area. It is envisioned that multiple alternatives would be considered for each objective
and consensus reached regarding which approach the committee would endorse. The final set of
recommendations will comprise the draft Rural Areas Policy Plan.
The draft plan would be shared with the rural community through a series of workshops. The intent of these
workshops would be to inform citizens and seek their feedback regarding the committee's recommendations.
Again, the number and locations of such workshops will follow the AOC model, potentially returning to sites
where the initial outreach sessions were held.
The draft plan would also be presented to a variety of local civic and special interest groups. Organizations
such as the Farm Bureau, Ruritan Club chapters, Top of Virginia Builders Association, and Frederick County
Fruit Growers Association will be targeted during this outreach effort.
Input received from the various public outreach sessions would be compiled and analyzed by the committee.
Modifications to the draft plan would be considered and, if deemed appropriate by the committee, endorsed
as amendments to the draft plan.
Following any necessary modifications, the draft plan would be scheduled for discussion with both the
Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Assuming the recommended plan is not sent back to
committee for additional study and/or revision, public hearings would be scheduled to follow the discussion
period.
The following Phase H schedule is presented to reflect the distinct time requirements for the options available
to complete Phase I. It is noted that the additional public input workshops included with Option 1 result in
an overall process time frame that is merely two months longer than that achieved via the Option 2 approach.
Tentative Time Frame: CPPS Policy Formulation - Option 1: March/April/May 2004
Option 2: January/February/March 2004
Public Outreach/Feedback - Option 1: June 2004
Option 2: April 2004
Policy Modifications - Option 1: July 2004
Option 2: May 2004
PC Discussion - Option 1: August 2004
Option 2: June 2004
Board Discussion - Option 1: September 2004
Option 2: July 2004
Public Hearings - Option 1: October 2004
Option 2: August 2004
U. I Christ Common IRuralWAS 20031ProcessOutline.Draftl.wpd