CPPC 05-24-04 Meeting AgendaCOUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
MEMORANDUM
TO: Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee
FROM: Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Planning Director U
DATE: May 18, 2004
RE: May Meeting and Agenda
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
The Frederick County Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) will be meeting
on Monday, May 24, 2004, at 7:00 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. Commencement of policy formulation phase of Rural Areas Study.
2) Other.
Please contact our department if you are unable to attend this meeting. Thank you.
Please note the earlier start time for this meeting.
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 county parking lot located behind the new addition or in the Joint Judicial
Center parking lot and follow the sidewalks to the back door of the four-story wing. The door will
be locked; therefore, please wait for staff to open the door.
CMM/dlw
Attachments
107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
ITEM #1
Rural Areas Study
Commencement of Policy Formulation Phase
Overview:
Using the input gathered in recent months from the public, stakeholders, and both the Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors, the committee will begin the policy formulation phase of the
Rural Areas Study. Through this phase of the study, a vision statement for the rural areas will be
articulated and policies will be drafted to facilitate attainment of this vision. In particular, the
committee will explore and endorse particular strategies, programs, and technique, the combination
of which will provide the framework for future growth in the rural areas. While this phase of the
study represents a tremendous challenge, it also presents an exciting opportunity to direct the course
of change in our rural areas and thereby influence the future of Frederick County in a most profound
way.
The Rural Problem Defined:
A recurring theme throughout the study to date has been confusion concerning the nature of the rural
"Problem" in Frederick County. Although there are numerous discrete issues that trouble the
community, the overarching challenges - or problems - involving the rural areas could be
summarized as follows:
• The county currently has minimal influence over the form and location of growth in the rural
areas.
Growth in the rural areas occurs at the expense of cxistim4 resources and the rural character.
• The costs of rural growth are not effectively addressed, either in physical or fiscal terms.
Again, there are many specific issues that represent problems to many residents of the rural areas as
well as stakeholders. However, these three general statements capture the essence of the emerging
rural problem in Frederick County and illuminate the comprehensiveness required of the
committee's policy response.
Policy Formulation Outline and Vision Statement Preparation:
Enclosed with this agenda is an outline intended to guide the committee's policy formulation
activities. The principal components of the policy program are identified, and a variety of
subordinate issues under each are stated that require resolution. As the committee proceeds through
this outline, it is expected that other issues will emerge that are critical to producing a set of
recommended policies for the rural areas. The attached outline should therefore be viewed as a
"living" framework for the policy formulation phase that is likely to expand as the intricacies of
identified issues are addressed. Each committee member is encourage to recommend additions to
the outline at any time during the formulation process.
A vision statement for the rural areas should be ratified by the committee at the outset of the policy
formulation process. As a generalized expression of core values and goals relating to the rural areas,
it is recommended that the vision statement acknowledge the following fundamental assumptions:
• Value of individual property rights.
• Value of community's rural identity.
• Value of the open spaces, scenic beauty and diverse resources of the rural areas.
• Value of agriculture as a cultural and economic resource.
• Recognition that growth and change are inevitable.
• Desire to manage growth and change to ensure perpetuation of rural character.
• Desire to manage growth and change to mitigate myriad impacts on community.
These core assumptions were derived from input received through the study process to date as well
as discussion by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Staff will prepare a draft
vision statement for consideration during the May 20 meeting that will be based upon these
assumptions. Amendments will be made to the set of assumptions and draft vision statement until
the committee has achieved consensus regarding the content and tone of the vision. Please give
some thought to what you believe to be a comprehensive and enduring vision for the rural areas as
you prepare for the upcoming committee meeting.
I.
Rural Areas Study
Policy Formulation Outline
May 18, 2004
Form of Development — Land Use Options
A. Clustering of New Homes
1. Minimum and maximum lot sizes for new rural lots.
2. Health systems (community drain fields, alternative systems).
3. Role of clustered development — determine if it is to be the
principal form for major rural subdivisions (i.e. subdivisions
yielding more than three lots).
B. Open Space and Resource Conservation
1. The Green Infrastructure — refers to all of Frederick County's
natural, cultural, and heritage resources as a defined system, to
include stream corridors, mountainsides, forested areas, historic
and archeological sites, wetlands, flood plain, sensitive soils (i.e.
limestone "belt"), as well as existing open space assets (natural,
eased and man-made). With conservation and open space
protection as a principal rural areas objective, the green
infrastructure would be employed as the principal organizing
concept for rural areas development, ensuring recognition and
integration of rural resources with all land use decisions, both
public and private.
2. Open Space Protection - Development Related:
i. Minimum expected open space area in cluster development
(i.e. percentage/ratio — currently 40%).
ii. Quality/value/organization of conserved open space — criteria
for evaluating and guiding configuration of open space
resources. Consider use of primary and secondary
conservation areas as means of classifying open space based
upon constituent resources (primary includes resources
protected by ordinance, secondary includes all other resources).
iii. Use(s) of conserved open space.
iv. Management of conserved open space
v. Use of conservation easements to secure open space set asides.
3. Open Space Protection - Non -Development Related:
i. Conservation easements/conservation easement authority.
ii. Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) [framework, priorities]
C. Relationship of Development to Existing Rural Roads
1. Limit access points onto existing secondary roads by restricting
access for newly subdivided lots to private/shared access
easements and new public roads, regardless of subdivision size or
type.
2. Rural Road Corridor Buffer — combination of distance and
preservation of existing roadside features (i.e. vegetation, fences)
to protect rural road viewsheds.
D. Regulatory Changes to Improve Rural Land Use Administration
1. Substandard Lots — determine appropriate/preferred approach for
addressing existing substandard lots in the rural areas (lots
consisting of less than two acres).
2. By Right and Conditional Uses — determine extent to which
additional non-residential uses are appropriate in the rural areas as
an alternative development option, and what process, if any, such
uses should follow to gain approval. Determine effect of current
ordinances on various rural economy uses (bed and breakfasts,
country inns, conference facilities, general small businesses, etc),
and consider policies to guide regulatory changes to spur rural
economic development.
3. Other Non -Discretionary Administrative Issues that Require Policy
Guidance/Clarification — per Zoning Administrator report.
II. Rural Rezoning Concept
A. Location(s) where new development would be subject to rezoning
approval. Determine whether to apply rezoning concept only to specific
geographic areas, or treat rural areas as single policy area and apply
rezoning concept to new development throughout.
2
B. Density to be allowed through rezoning. Determine whether rezoning will
be used as a means to achieve the overall rural density of one unit per five
acres (i.e. prior to subdividing, rezoning approval would be needed).
C. Size/scale of development that would be subject to rezoning approval.
Determine whether there is a unit or lot threshold above which a
development would require rezoning approval (i.e. over three ... two... ten
lots). Address potential for retention of limited administrative (by right)
subdivision approvals and define parameters for such activity (i.e.
one... two... three lots, per year ... three years ... five years).
D. Format of zoning district to be employed with rural rezoning, distinguish
from existing Rural Areas district (i.e. rural residential district).
E. Criteria for rezoning approval in rural areas.
F. Scope and composition of impact analysis for rural rezoning application to
address fiscal and physical costs of growth (i.e. fiscal impact analysis,
transportation impact analysis, green infrastructure/open space analysis).
III. Rural Community Centers (RCC)
A. Reaffirm need for unique land use plans for each RCC, but expand upon
existing general RCC policies to better guide land use in the interim.
Determine role of RCCs in future of rural areas and express accordingly.
B. Consider role of rezoning in RCC context. Determine whether a higher
density than the overall rural density of one unit per five acres should be
permitted on land surrounding each RCC, or perhaps on land surrounding
select RCCs.
C. Establish "area of influence" surrounding RCCs wherein a rezoning would
be subject to RCC design policies, and/or would be enabled to pursue
higher densities and mixed land uses (pursuant to resolution of III.B.).
D. Role of small area plans for individual RCCs in rezoning process. Related
to each of above RCC points, determine whether densities permitted in
"areas of influence" should be guided by unique RCC plans, or, in the
interim, by general RCC policies.
E. Role of Package Treatment Plants in RCC development. Arguably most
logical context for consideration of package treatment plant use in rural
areas, as such facilities could support enhanced densities and also provide
means for providing sewer service to existing RCC residents, many of
which possess failing health systems. Determine whether such limited use
3
would be appropriate and establish general parameters for ownership,
management, etc.
IV. Agricultural Support
A. Role of Agricultural and Forestal Districts. Determine means through
which the agricultural district program could be more effective as a land
use planning and farmland protection tool. Use districts to physically and
fiscally distinguish active agriculture from non-farm open space and other
rural land uses that currently enjoy benefits of land use valuation system.
Explore provision of additional tax incentives via formation of special tax
districts that correspond with agricultural districts, or limit application of
land use valuation to property within such districts, etc.
B. Address problems associated with land use incompatibilities.
C. Role of county in creation and management of public education programs
intended to expand general awareness of the benefits of local agriculture,
as well as its realities for new rural residents.
D. Ensure both development and non -development related open space is
available for agricultural use. Preclude prohibitions of such use in deed
covenants of new rural subdivisions.
E. Articulate support for collaboration with Virginia Tech and the Fruit
Research Laboratory in the designation of Frederick County as an urban
agricultural laboratory.
F. Role of county in creation and management of marketing advisory or
assistance programs for local agricultural community. Promotion of rural
economic development founded upon a diverse agricultural base.
V. Transportation
A. Determine role of alternative modes of transportation in rural areas
(bicycle, pedestrian/hiking, horseback). Establish goal of multi -modal
system for rural areas that links with UDA at key nodes.
B. Establish scope for transportation analysis associated with rural rezoning
applications. Determine expectations of private developer in mitigation of
traffic impacts of new rural development.
M