Loading...
CPPC 12-08-03 Meeting AgendaCOUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee FROM: Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Planning Directo DATE: December 1, 2003 RE: December Meeting and Agenda The Frederick County Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) will be meeting on Monday, December 8, 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. 2) 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 Centerparking 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. File Copy 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 -------------------------------- .aria'�.AMv0MV..'B NO&IM"A. 4�?R ' i pili:k ' '.k�tl1�EG a�3lCA7' �Cik A""i 1TEM #1 Rural Areas Study Issues Identification: Transportation and Public Services and Facilities Summary of 10/13/03 Discussion The committee began review of the seven policy areas comprising the Rural Areas Study, with discussion focused on the identification of issues involving the rural economy and rural community centers, respectively. The following issues were highlighted: Rural Economy: 1. The agricultural economy is rapidly changing due to the decline of the traditional large scale farming operation. 2. A working farm today requires less land than farms of the past due to efficiencies achieved through advances in agricultural techniques and technologies. 3. Farming is a business and must therefore be profitable to remain viable. 4. A profit is increasingly difficult to realize thereby requiring farmers to sell land to obtain the capital needed to sustain farming operations. The best land for farming is also the most conducive to private septic systems and therefore new residential development. 6. The future of the local fruit industry is likely to be small operations serving "niche" markets. 7. The County needs to play a direct role in cultivating local markets for locally grown crops. 8. The location of Virginia Tech's Agricultural Research Center in Frederick County presents a unique opportunity to develop relationships and programs that may benefit the local agricultural community. 9. The County should explore policies that support the area's use by Virginia Tech as an "urban agricultural" laboratory, which, coupled with community visioning, may assist in opening new avenues for agricultural activity. 10. The "structure" necessary to create and sustain new relationships between farmers and the local market should be established to promote a new perspective on the future of agriculture in Frederick County. Specifically, the County should explore and institute the policies, programs and staff necessary to develop such relationships, perhaps in collaboration with Virginia Tech and the Economic Development Commission. 11. Approach to rural economy must be future oriented and therefore focused on facilitating economic opportunities that transcend what Frederick County has historically known. in its rural areas. Rural Community Centers: The rural community centers currently identified in the Comprehensive Policy Plan accurately capture the established nodes of activity in the rural areas. 2. Small area plans need to be developed for each rural community center as per established policy. However, such planning should be undertaken as a separate exercise, rather than as a part of a larger rural areas planning process. 3. Although the character of the rural community centers has generally been maintained over time, the number of small businesses has diminished within community center core areas and new residential uses are beginning to locate on the fringes of community centers. 4. New development proposals in the vicinity of the rural community centers of Stephenson, Clearbrook, Brucetown and Round Hill will result in the location of public sewer facilities adjacent to these areas in the foreseeable future. As such, strategies must be developed to extend facilities into these community centers and conclusively address identified problems with private septic systems. 5. Rural community centers served by public facilities should be planned to accommodate additional development and thereby function as a "relief valve" for development pressure in the greater rural areas of the County. 6. In addition to the rural community centers, the Comprehensive Policy Plan must recognize the towns of Stephens City and Middletown as focal points of activity that influence land use in the rural areas. The above issues will be shared with the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors during the annual retreat scheduled for February 7, 2004. Subsequent to the retreat, these issues will be shared through a series of workshops with the public and stakeholder groups who will be invited to offer comment and identify additional issues under each policy area. Workshop participants will further be asked to offer the committee recommendations concerning those issues that are of particular concern and require policy responses. It is requested that CPPS members review the above issues to ensure that the committee's discussion was accurately captured by staff. Please identify any clarifications or additions that you believe are necessary to more precisely convey the interests and concerns of the committee regarding the rural economy and rural community centers. Primer for 12/08/03 Discussion Transportation and Community Facilities: The symbiotic relationship between public investment in infrastructure and the location of new development is a well documented planning reality. Indeed, one of the principal tools a jurisdiction possesses in directing the pattern and - to a certain degree - pace of development is the funding and placement of public infrastructure and services. This is particularly true relative to road improvements and the provision of public water and sewer facilities. An example of the recognized nexus between public facilities and the intensity of development is the increasing use of urban growth boundaries as a means of defining the geographic area wherein public investment will be focused and, in turn, where more intensive forms of development are planned. Frederick County has employed this concept through the combined use of the Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Of course, not all development occurs within established growth boundaries and therefore places demands on existing rural infrastructure that is not necessarily planned to accommodate such growth. In the case of Frederick County, approximately 30% of all new residential dwellings are developed on rural land outside of the UDA, with fully one half of the County's population residing in the rural areas. This population is served almost exclusively by on-site private well and septic systems and utilizes the vast system of secondary roads that traverse the County for access. Assuming continued population growth in the rural areas of Frederick County, impacts on the rural infrastructure will inevitably increase and existing service capacities will be stressed. Community Facilities and Services New rural residential development is often located a substantial distance from existing and planned nodes of employment and commercial activity as well as cultural and public amenities, to include libraries and educational facilities. Moreover, the dispersed nature of rural residential land use effectively extends the rural population away from centralized medical facilities, and beyond easy access by emergency services and public safety personnel. Such geographic realities present distinct service delivery challenges to affected public agencies, and potentially impact the quality of life enjoyed by rural residents. Although the availability of public amenities comparable to those provided in the UDA may serve as an inducement to new development, it is important to consider the extent to which public services and facilities should be located in the rural areas. More importantly, in what manner can new development occur that will maximize efficiencies in service delivery, particularly relative to essential services such as public health, safety, and education. Transportation Using traffic generation figures from the I.T.E. Tri Generation Manual 6th Edition, each new residential unit built in the rural areas adds roughly ten (10) vehicle trips per day to the roads that connect the household to the community. Increases in residential traffic on rural roads often result in intensified demands by new and old residents alike for improvements to the conditions of such roads, many of which have historically consisted of narrow widths and/or gravel surfaces. Moreover, new trips may stress or exceed the designed capacity of rural roads thereby diminishing their safety and efficiency, especially as residential and agricultural traffic co -mingle. Rural roads also must accommodate school bus and emergency services traffic serving both established and new residences. All public roads in Frederick County are owned and maintained by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Development in the rural areas generally occurs via "by right" subdivision activity, meaning that the review process is primarily an administrative function oriented on ensuring compliance with applicable ordinance and other technical standards. As such, the scope of the transportation improvement program proposed by an applicant and subsequent staff analysis is limited to subdivision access and the internal street network. Indeed, improvements to the external road system are more challenging to achieve via "by right" development, and are certainly beyond the County's jurisdiction to compel. Traffic impacts generated through "by right" development are therefore absorbed by the secondary and primary road systems without mitigation. Addressing the form and function of the rural transportation network is an important component of the Rural Areas Study. Improving safety is arguably the foremost objective of any rural transportation policy. Large scale road improvement projects may not always be necessary to achieve enhanced safety, as approaches including access management strategies and intelligent transportation systems (ITS) are possible alternatives that may be effective. Also promoting safety, the VDOT Rural Rustic Road program seeks to improve surface conditions through coordination with local efforts to limit the intensity of development along targeted rural roads. This program promises to provide a more expedient method for hard surfacing rural roads in the County than is currently possible. However, more substantial improvement projects such as lane additions and road widening may indeed be necessary on certain rural routes to achieve improved level of service conditions in the context of steadily increasing trip counts. Such improvements must be scheduled through the Frederick County Secondary Road Improvement Plan and ultimately completed when funding is available from VDOT. Trafficshed analysis represents another method available to evaluate the impacts of new vehicle trips on the capacity of rural roads. If effectively linked to the subdivision review process, trafficshed analysis may offer a means of measuring the adequacy of existing transportation infrastructure to serve new development and, in turn, quantify what improvements are needed to accommodate a proposed project. At present, no such system is used to evaluate system- wide impacts of "by right" development. In addition to general road conditions, it is appropriate to consider methods for creating a multi- modal transportation system within the rural areas. In particular, the Rural Areas Study should explore opportunities to achieve an environment conducive to bicycle, pedestrian, and horseback travel. A system capable of supporting such travel modes would not only enable alternatives to the automobile, but also promote the recreational and environmental value of the rural landscape.