HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017 LPPRP
WASHINGTON
COUNTY,
MARYLAND
2017
LAND
PRESERVATION,
PARKS AND
RECREATION
PLAN
i
Acknowledgements
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Terry L. Baker, President
Jeffrey A. Cline, Vice-president
John F. Barr
Wayne K. Keefer
Leroy E. Myers
County Administrator
Robert Slocum
Washington County Planning Commission
Clint Wiley, Chair
Andrew Bowen, Vice-chair
Dennis Reeder
Robert “B.J.” Goetz, Jr.
David Kline
Jeremiah Weddle
Leroy Myers, Ex-officio
Washington County Recreation and Parks Advisory Board
Greg Shank, Chair
Brian Albert
Brian Getz
Danny Kerns
Eric Michael
Nica Sutch
Bradley Tritsch
Terry L. Baker, Ex-officio
This Plan was prepared by the Washington County Department of Planning and Zoning with assistance
from the Department of Parks and Facilities and the Department of Recreation and Fitness.
Department of Planning and Zoning
Stephen T. Goodrich, Director
Jill Baker, Chief Planner
Fred Nugent, Parks and Environmental Planner
Meghan Jenkins, GIS Analyst
Debra Eckard, Administrative Assistant
Department of Parks and Facilities
John Pennesi, Director
Daniel Hixon, Field Operations Manager
Department of Fitness and Recreation
Jamie Dick, Director
Adopted May 8, 2018
Amended October 16, 2018
1
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 3
General Geographic Information .............................................................................................................. 3
Geology and Soils .................................................................................................................................................. 5
Forest Resources ................................................................................................................................................... 5
General Population and Demographic Information ................................................................................. 6
Population ............................................................................................................................................................. 6
Households ........................................................................................................................................................... 7
Socio-Economic Characteristics ............................................................................................................................ 7 Age Cohorts ........................................................................................................................................................... 8
Per Capita and Household Income Characteristics ............................................................................................... 8
Overview of County Protected Lands ....................................................................................................... 9
Parks and Recreation Facilities ........................................................................................................................... 10
Natural Resource Protection Areas ..................................................................................................................... 11
Agricultural Land Preservation............................................................................................................................ 12
PARKS AND RECREATION ............................................................................................................................ 12
Overview of the Parks and Recreation System in Washington County .................................................. 12
County Goals and Objectives for Parks, Facilities and Recreation Programs ......................................... 14
The County Park system shall consist of a balance of Neighborhood, Community and Regional Parks. ........... 14
Locate recreational facilities for the convenience and benefit of the most people. .......................................... 15
Provide a safe and secure environment for the users of the County Parkland System. ..................................... 15
Coordinate recreational programming to meet the diversified needs of County citizens. ................................ 15
Provide an economic strategy for acquisition, construction, operation and maintenance of a centrally located
multi-use facility. ................................................................................................................................................ 15
State Goals for Parks and Recreation...................................................................................................... 16
Maryland Project Green Classrooms (Maryland Partnership for Children in Nature) ........................................ 17
Program Implementation ........................................................................................................................ 17
Implementation of Previous Plan ....................................................................................................................... 17
Planning .............................................................................................................................................................. 19
Land Acquisition and Facility Development ........................................................................................................ 20
Regulatory Land Development Ordinances ........................................................................................................ 22
Joint Use Agreements ......................................................................................................................................... 23
Inventory of Existing Public Parks and Recreation Facilities ................................................................... 23
Measuring User Demand ........................................................................................................................ 25
Public Engagement and Outreach ...................................................................................................................... 25
Usage, Demands, and Participation Rates .............................................................................................. 27
Parks.................................................................................................................................................................... 28
Parks with League Play ........................................................................................................................................ 28
2
Recreation Programs .......................................................................................................................................... 29
Level of Service Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 32
Park Equity Analysis ............................................................................................................................................ 32
Park Proximity Analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 34
Access Analysis .................................................................................................................................................... 36
Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................................... 40
Priorities and Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 41
Parkland Acquisition ........................................................................................................................................... 41
Greenways/Rail Trails/Water Trails .................................................................................................................... 41
Joint Use of School Facilities ............................................................................................................................... 42
Bicycling and Pedestrian Safety and Health ........................................................................................................ 42
Community Recreation Centers .......................................................................................................................... 43
Participation Survey ............................................................................................................................................ 43
NATURAL RESOURCE LAND CONSERVATION .............................................................................................. 44
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 44
Goals for Natural Resource Land Conservation ...................................................................................... 45
Inventory of Protected Natural Resource Lands and Mapping .............................................................. 47
Implementation of Resource Management ............................................................................................ 48
Implementation of Previous Plan ....................................................................................................................... 48
Comprehensive Plan ........................................................................................................................................... 49 Special Planning Areas ........................................................................................................................................ 50
Sensitive Areas Element ...................................................................................................................................... 50
Watershed Management Programs .................................................................................................................... 50
Forest Resource Management Programs ........................................................................................................... 52
Streams and Floodplains ..................................................................................................................................... 53
Subdivision Ordinance/Zoning Ordinance .......................................................................................................... 54
Floodplain Management Ordinance ................................................................................................................... 54
Habitat and Wildlife ............................................................................................................................................ 55
AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION AND EASEMENT ACQUISITION PROGRAMS .................................. 58
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 58
Agricultural Industry in Washington County ........................................................................................... 58
Goals for Agricultural Land Preservation ................................................................................................ 59
Implementation Programs and Services ................................................................................................. 60
Implementation of Previous Plan ....................................................................................................................... 60
Land Use Management ........................................................................................................................... 64
APPENDICIES ............................................................................................................................................... 67
3
INTRODUCTION
The Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan is one of several functional plans that support
the goals and objectives of the adopted Comprehensive Plan for the County. The purpose of this plan is
to focus on current open space opportunities, analyze future impacts from growth, and develop a
coordinated plan to address future open space needs. This is important for several reasons including:
Public Investment: Limited funding and high demand for open space and recreation
areas, make it imperative that investments made in park
lands and recreation programs are as cost effective as
possible.
Resource Protection: Recreation and resource protection
can be mutually supportive activities. There are ways to
integrate passive and active recreational activities into
areas that can also be reserved for resource protection as
in the C & O Canal Towpath. This area provides
opportunities for active recreation while serving as an
invaluable buffer to the Potomac River in terms of
flooding and bank erosion.
Social Integration: Recreational activities provide an
outlet for people with similar interests to come together
and socialize. Long range park plans should contain
suitable flexibility to respond to changing social and
economic demographics while not losing sight of long
range established goals.
Health and Wellness: More and more people within the United States are becoming
overweight. With health issues like heart disease and diabetes on the rise, it is
important to provide open space areas and recreational programs for people to play
and exercise.
Access and Functionality: Rising gasoline prices place special emphasis on park
accessibility to and from residential neighborhoods. Changing interests over time
have been reflected in the changes in the expectations of park users. Parks with
passive uses, playgrounds, tennis courts and athletic fields meet some user’s needs,
while other users expect dedicated walking and fitness paths, bicycle trails, dog parks,
and horse trails.
Note to Readers: All of the maps embedded in this Plan are included in Appendix A as full-size graphics
for better clarity.
General Geographic Information
Washington County is one of four counties commonly described as “Western Maryland”. It is
bounded to the East by Frederick County; the North by Pennsylvania (Mason-Dixon Line); to the West by
Allegany County, and the South by the Potomac River. There are nine (9) incorporated municipalities
The Comprehensive Plan for
the County is a land use plan
that recognizes the need to
preserve the county’s unique
character, protect the
environment, and enhance
those economic opportunities
that are connected to
agriculture, history, and
tourism.
4
located within the County. Hagerstown, the County seat, is located approximately 70 miles northwest of
Baltimore and Washington DC and 165 miles southeast of Pittsburgh, and is the largest municipality within
the County. A detailed description of the topography is available in the Comprehensive Plan for
Washington County.
The County contains 467 square miles (298,282 acres), of which approximately 455 square miles
are land. There are over 100 miles of shoreline along the Potomac River. There are no natural lakes. The
terrain consists of ridges and broad valleys running in a northeast/southwest direction.
The Great Valley, also called the Great Appalachian Valley or Great Valley Region, is one of the
major landform features of eastern North America. It is a gigantic trough – a chain of valley lowlands –
and the central feature of the Appalachian Mountain system. The trough stretches about 1200 miles from
Quebec to
Alabama and has
been an important
north-south route
of travel since
prehistoric times.
Washington
County contains
the Maryland part
of the Great Valley
and is geologically
diverse, including
parts of two physi-
graphic provinces
– the Blue Ridge
and the Ridge and
Valley. (See Map 1)
South Mountain
and Elk Ridge,
extending north to
south along the
eastern boundary
of the County, are
the westernmost
extent of the Blue Ridge province. The Hagerstown Valley extends from the west base of South Mountain
to Fairview Mountain west of Clear Spring, where the small ridges and valleys begin and run to the west
as part of the Ridge and Valley physiographic province (See Map 1). Elevations range from Quirack
Mountain at 2,145 feet in the northeast corner of the County, to 300 feet above sea level in the southern
end of the Hagerstown Valley near the Potomac River.
Slopes are steepest along the eastern border of Washington County, and in the areas between
Licking Creek and Little Conococheague Creek; along the Little Tonoloway Creek; and along Sideling Hill
Creek. More than half of the land area of the County is in the Hagerstown Valley, which is, to the greatest
extent, gently rolling. Nearly 30% of the County’s total land area has slopes greater than 15% with an
additional 8,000 acres on slopes above 30%.
Map 1: Physiographic Provinces
5
Geology and Soils
The surface rock strata and most of the subsurface rock in the County consist of limestone, shale
and sandstone. The Hagerstown Valley is underlain mostly by relatively soluble limestone and shows
evidence of the sinkholes and caverns associated with karst geology. As a result, the County has the largest
number of known caves in Maryland. The narrower valleys are underlain mostly by shale while the ridges
are formed by resistant sandstone or quartzite.
The topography of the County varies greatly due to its physiographic location. The Hagerstown
Valley, which includes over half the land area of the County, is primarily flat with gently rolling hills. The
eastern border of the County along South Mountain, as well as the beginning of the Ridge and Valley
system starting at Fairview Mountain west of Clear Spring contain the steepest slopes in the County.
Slopes are also steep along most of the creek beds in the County due to years of erosion as the streams
meandered.
The best quality soils for agriculture are primarily located in the Great (Hagerstown) Valley region of
the County extending from the base of South Mountain west to Clear Spring. Areas of high quality soils
near Clear Spring and in the southern part of the County, east and south of Sharpsburg have also been
targeted for protection through a variety of agricultural preservation easement programs.
Forest Resources
Before settlement and farming began, most of the County was covered with hardwood forest.
Now, the significant remaining forested areas are along South Mountain and in the western portion of the
County. Forests are primarily located on steep slopes including the Elk Ridge and Red Hill areas in the
south end of the County, the ridges north and west of Clear Spring, and the ridges west of Hancock.
Additional forested areas are in the Hagerstown Valley where the land is too rocky or steep for
development or farming.
Bottomland forests are found along the fertile floodplains of Conococheague and Antietam
Creeks, and along the Potomac River. Most of the forest is the Oak-Hickory type (75%). Remaining forest
is classified as Oak/Pine (12.5%), Elm/Ash/Red Maple (6.7%) and northern hardwoods (5.6%).
Forested resource land, including commercial forest and local, State and Federal forest preserves
comprise 35.9% of the County or approximately 107,300 acres. State owned forest land is extensive; over
9,000 acres are located along South Mountain protecting the Appalachian Trail corridor and containing
several State parks. Significant areas of State owned forest are also located in the western end of the
County, including 6,300 acres in the Indian Springs area and over 3,000 acres in the Sideling Hill Wildlife
Management Area (WMA) (See Map 2). The City owned areas of the Edgemont Watershed on South
Mountain preserve include approximately 2,040 acres of woodlands for water supply, open space, and
limited recreational uses. Approximately 7,800 acres are protected along the east bank of the Potomac
River, within the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park.
6
Map 2: Natural Features of Washington County, MD
General Population and Demographic Information
Population
Washington County is made up of a diverse community of approximately 147,430 people.1 This
is an increase in population of 15,507 people (or 11.75%) since the 2000 Census. According to the 2002
Comprehensive Plan, the County was predicted only to grow to about 140,800 people (or 6.7%). These
predictions were based on historic growth rates in the County along with decreases in household size and
higher amounts of housing stock.
Population projections have been very difficult to evaluate over the last decade due to heavy
fluctuations in the economy and housing markets. While the economy flourished during the end of the
1990’s and into the beginning of the 2000’s, the housing market also flourished bringing in a much higher
number of new citizens than previously predicted. In the mid 2000’s, the economy and housing markets
began to dramatically decrease. These intense fluctuations in a short period of time have made land use
planning very difficult to predict. It appears that these fluctuations are beginning to flatten out into a more
predictable pattern.
1 US Census Bureau, 2010 Census
7
According to the Maryland De-
partment of Planning, Washington
County is projected to increase by
another 46,020 people (or 31.2%)
between 2010 and 2040 (See Figure
1). The County Planning Department
has also developed population
projections through the next 20-year
timeframe. The projections closely
mimic those of the State through
2030 but slightly diverge through the
2040-year timeframe. The County
projection shows an increase in
population of approximately 53,144
people (or 36%) through 2040.
Households
The standard economic definition of a household is the number of persons living together in one
housing unit. More simply, a household is equivalent to any occupied housing unit. Households are
broken down into family (where residents are related to primary householder through birth, marriage or
adoption) and non-family (where residents are unrelated). This statistic is important in understanding the
demand for types of living quarters and estimating population fluctuations based on new unit
development.
According to the 2010 Census, Washington County has approximately 55,687 households of which
37,662, or 67.4%, are family households. A breakdown of household types is shown in Table 1.
Household Type Total
% of Total
Households
Yes No
Family Households
Married Couple Families 10,652 17,291 27,943 49.8%
Male Householder, No Wife 1,332 1,255 2,587 4.6%
Female Householder, No Husband 4,266 2,979 7,245 12.9%
Subtotal 16,250 21,525 37,775 67.4%
Non-Family Households 2,744 15,548 18,292 32.6%
Totals 18,994 37,073 56,067 100.0%
Source: US Census Bureau, ACS 2015 estimates
Children in Household?
Households in Washington County - 2015
Table 1: Households in Washington County, MD (2015)
Socio-Economic Characteristics
Male vs. Female
Figure 1: Population Projections 2010-2040; Washington County, MD
8
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
Male – County 51.1% 50.8% 51.1% 51.3% 50.1%
Female – County 48.9% 49.2% 48.9% 48.7% 49.9%
Male – State 48.3% 48.4% 48.3% 48.4% 48.1%
Female State 51.7% 51.6% 51.7% 51.6% 51.9%
Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 & Maryland Department of Planning
Table 2: Gender Characteristics of Washington County, (MD 2000-2014)
White vs. Non-White
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
White – County 90.2% 87.4% 84.7% 82.7% 71.3%
Non-White – County 9.8% 12.6% 15.3% 17.3% 28.6%
White – State 66.0% 60.4% 60.5% 58.5% 43.8%
Non-White - State 34.0% 39.6% 39.5% 41.5% 56.2%
Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 & Maryland Department of Planning
Table 3: Characteristics of Race in Washington County, MD (2000-2040)
Age Cohorts
Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 & Maryland Department of Planning
Figure 2: Age Cohorts of Washington County, MD (2000-2040)
Per Capita and Household Income Characteristics
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%CountyStateCountyStateCountyStateCountyStateCountyState2000 2010 2020 2030 2040% of PopulationComparison of Age Cohorts
65+
45-64
20-44
5-19
0-4
9
Total Households 56,067 100.0%2,166,389 100.0%
Income Range
Less than $10,000 3,051 5.4%110,926 5.1%
$10,000 to $14,999 2,694 4.8%71,461 3.3%
$15,000 to $24,999 6,359 11.3%149,200 6.9%
$25,000 to $34,999 5,431 9.7%156,267 7.2%
$35,000 to $49,000 7,570 13.5%230,782 10.7%
$50,000 to $74,999 11,332 20.2%370,180 17.1%
$75,000 to $99,999 7,410 13.2%289,546 13.4%
$100,000 to $149,999 7,685 13.7%394,212 18.2%
$150,000 to $199,999 2,662 4.7%194,589 9.0%
$200,000 or more 1,813 3.3%199,226 9.2%
Median Household Income
Washington County Maryland
Household Income Characteristics for Washington County and Maryland
$54,606 $73,851
Source: US Census Bureau & MD Department of Planning, 2014 estimates
Table 4: Household Income Characteristics for Washington County, MD
Overview of County Protected Lands
As previously stated in this Plan, there are many benefits that protected lands and parklands
provide to the citizens of the State and the County. These amenities provide a better quality of life for
citizens by: providing areas for recreational activities that creates a healthier community; protecting
resource lands to sustain viable food systems and ecosystems; providing job opportunities and injecting
money into local and regional economies; and providing areas for future generations to thrive and grow.
The County attempts to achieve these objectives through various programs of land and resource
protection.
There are three primary areas of open space protections that are evaluated in this document:
• Parks and Recreation
• Natural Resource Protection
• Agricultural Land Preservation
Through a combination of various financial
and development incentives, the County has made
great strides in protecting these various types of
activities. Each of these areas will be discussed in
more detail throughout the document; however, a
short primer has been included here to help citizens
understand the different aspects of land preservation
across the County. The Protected Lands Map (Map 3)
provides an overview of the protected lands and
recreational areas in Washington County. A full size
map is included in Appendix A.
Photo 1: Agricultural Lands in Washington County,
MD
10
Map 3: Protected Lands of Washington County, Maryland
Parks and Recreation Facilities
Currently the County has a large system of Federal, State, and local parks that provide varying
degrees of active and passive recreation. Typically, parkland and recreational opportunities are located
on publicly owned lands rather than on private property. As shown on the Protected Lands map the
overwhelming majority (nearly 35,000 acres) of our open space protections are in the form of
governmentally owned lands. While these areas have the general connotation of being “park” land, they
serve multiple purposes.
There are three Federal Park systems located within Washington County: Antietam National
Battlefield, Harper’s Ferry National Historical Park, and the Chesapeake and Ohio National Historical Park.
The primary intent of each of these parks is to protect historical aspects of the area through education
and historical interpretation programs. They also make some limited recreational opportunities available
such as biking, hiking, camping, horseback riding, and walking/jogging trails.
The State of Maryland also owns and maintains lands in Washington County that includes eight
(8) State Parks and three (3) Wildlife Management Areas. The State Parks include Fort Frederick,
Gathland, Greenbrier, South Mountain (includes Appalachian Trail), South Mountain Battlefield,
Washington Monument, Woodmont, and the Western Maryland Rail Trail. Wildlife Management Areas
11
include Indians Springs, Sideling Hill, and Prather’s Neck. There is a wide variety of passive and active
recreational opportunities in these areas including biking, hiking, camping, horseback riding,
walking/jogging, swimming, and playgrounds.
At a County level, there are approximately seventeen (17) separate parks that are owned and
maintained through the County Department of Park and Facilities. They include the Agricultural Education
Center, Black Rock Golf Course (includes the Regional Park), Camp Harding, Chestnut Grove, Clear Spring,
Devil’s Backbone, Doub’s Woods, Kemps Mill, Marty
Snook, Mt. Briar Wetland Preserve, Pen Mar, Pinesburg
Softball Complex, Piper Lane, Pleasant Valley, Wilson
Bridge, and Woodland Way. These areas offer more
active recreational opportunities such as sports fields
(soccer, baseball, football, softball, etc.), playgrounds,
golf courses, and courts (basketball, tennis, volleyball,
etc.). Also included but not specifically depicted on the
map, are different public-school locations where
agreements have been coordinated between the
County and the local Board of Education whereby
various indoor facilities such as gymnasiums are being
used by the County Recreation Department to support
other local recreation programs.
Finally, there are nine (9) incorporated municipalities within the County that also provide parks
and recreational opportunities to residents within their boundaries and within the County. Those
municipalities include the City of Hagerstown (21 parks) and the Towns of Boonsboro (1 park), Clear Spring
(no municipal parks but 1 County park); Funkstown (1 park), Hancock (3 parks), Keedysville (1 park),
Sharpsburg (1 park), Smithsburg (2 parks), and Williamsport (2 parks). These areas also serve a similar
purpose to those of the County by providing active and passive recreation areas.
Natural Resource Protection Areas
First and foremost, it is the purpose of these areas to protect land and/or related water areas for which
natural resource protection, conservation or management is of primary importance. But along with
protection of these resources, it can provide opportunities for limited types of recreation such as hiking,
camping, hunting, etc. A prime example of these areas are
in the Wildlife Management Areas established by the State.
While established primarily for the protection of habitat for
local wildlife the areas also provide limited recreation
opportunities.
Like the parkland areas of the County, many of the
larger Natural Resource Protection Areas are located on
publicly owned lands. However, there are also numerous
voluntary programs currently being implemented in the
County to apply permanent easements on private property
to protect our natural resources. These programs will be discussed in greater detail later in the document
and include:
Natural Resource Protection
Areas often serve a multi-
purpose effort in land
protection and preservation
goals.
Photo 2: Albert Powell State Fish Hatchery
12
• Rural Legacy
• Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP)
• Mid-Maryland Land Trust (MMLT)
• Maryland Environmental Trust (MET)
• Other scenic and environmental easement programs
One other point of interest that does not appear on the protected lands map is the effort of
private conservation and special interest groups in the County that work to obtain easements or
development restrictions on private property. Groups such as The Nature Conservancy, Save Historic
Antietam Foundation, Civil War Trust, Maryland Historic Trust, etc. work independently of most
government entities but also work closely with them to ensure their goals for preservation and
conservation are aligned and that efforts are not duplicated or inefficient.
Agricultural Land Preservation
Unlike the other two areas of land preservation efforts, Agricultural Land Preservation focuses
attention specifically on conservation of prime farmland through easements on private property. These
programs center on paying farmers to extinguish development rights so that farmers can keep their
businesses financially viable without needing to resort to subdivision of building lots as a means of income.
This creates a win-win situation by extinguishing development potential that could lead to long term
sprawl and infrastructure issues for the County and also providing support to the farming industry by
providing another source of income for the farmer to invest into the business.
There are two primary programs that are used to achieve our agricultural land preservation goals;
agricultural districts and permanent easements. These will be described in greater detail later in the
document; but basically, if a farmer is interested in selling an easement to the County they must first apply
for an agricultural district. The district is a semi-permanent type of easement by which the property
owners agree that they will not develop their property for a minimum of 10 years and in exchange for that
concession, the County provides a property tax break on the land. Once in the district, a property owner
may then apply for a permanent easement. This process is currently very competitive and some farmers
may wait years for funding to become available for the purchase of their easement.
Because these types of programs are voluntary, they can also be sporadic. As seen on the
Protected Lands Map, the agricultural districts have been applied on properties all over the rural area.
However, when the County seeks to officially purchase an easement a more in-depth analysis of the
property takes place to ensure that funds are being spent as efficiently as possible and that large areas of
contiguous land are being created to help support the agricultural industry. On the map there is a clear
delineation of three primary areas the County is focused on for these types of easements: prime farmlands
north and east of Clear Spring, north of Smithsburg, and south of Williamsport.
PARKS AND RECREATION
Overview of the Parks and Recreation System in Washington County
13
Parks and recreation facilities in Washington County
are situated to provide a variety of locations and facilities to
suit the interests of County residents and visitors. A
combination of Federal, State, and local parks along with a
few private organizational parks provide opportunities
throughout the County for active and passive recreational
activities as well as areas of natural resource protection,
historic preservation, and social interaction.
Public parks, recreational amenities and their
associated programs provide benefits to County residents
and visitors on many levels. Organized, scheduled programs
can remove the final obstacle for people who desire to
increase physical activity, become more social, find new
friends, etc., but have not because they did not have the
time to plan for them, or have access to facilities via any
other means. For many, the availability of public green
space is an asset. Frequent exposure to nature, even in
a passive way, has been shown to have positive effects.
Parklands also provide safe, pleasant alternatives to the
jogger, walker, biker, who has developed a fitness
regimen on their own, and prefers this setting to
developed areas.
Most of the parklands under the ownership and
direction of Federal and State governments provide
more passive type recreational opportunities such as
hiking/walking/biking trails, picnic areas, playgrounds,
camping areas, and educational facilities such as nature centers or museums. These areas also support
environmental conservation and natural resource
protection goals by maintaining areas in a mostly
primitive state with low to moderate impacts from
human usage.
Local and municipal parks are primarily focused
toward more active forms of recreation such as play
fields, hard court sports, playgrounds, swimming pools,
and indoor recreation centers. These areas can also
have a duality about them for conservation and
educational purposes.
The Washington County Recreation
Department provides individuals in Washington County
the opportunity to enjoy affordable recreation and
fitness classes with programs for both youth and adults which support a healthy lifestyle. The department
offers more than 30 individual or seasonal programs including the popular Summer Outdoor Music Series,
heritage based educational programs, a wide range of fitness based programs, and many organized
leagues for all ages. Most are offered in public parks and in County school facilities.
Photo 3: Pavilion Facility at Devil’s Backbone
Park
Photo 4: View of the Hagerstown Valley from Pen
Mar Park
Photo 5: Black Rock Golf Course
14
Washington County owns and maintains 18 parks or recreational facilities. Maintenance is
planned and performed by the Parks and Facilities Department, which is a section of the Division of Public
Works. As outlined in the parks inventory in Appendix B of this document, most of the County parks
contain picnic and playground areas. Many
of the parks also include active field/court-
based recreation opportunities. The
County is also unique in that it owns and
operates an award winning 18-hole golf
course, Black Rock Golf Course.
While the County has many
opportunities for active field sport
activities, there are some gaps in local
natural resource-based recreation
opportunities. The County continues to
work with private property owners to
locate public access to local waterways, and
therefore, provide more opportunities for
activities such as fishing and kayaking.
In total, Washington County has a total of approximately 32,625 acres of public parklands and
natural resources lands. As shown in Figure 3, most of parkland and natural resource lands are located in
either State or Federal parks.
County Goals and Objectives for Parks, Facilities and Recreation Programs
Washington County has been and will continue to be a proactive agency in administering
recreational opportunities to its citizens. The Goals and Objectives listed below represent the on-going
collaboration of Staff, the Parks Advisory Committee, the Planning Commission, and the Board of County
Commissioners to provide exemplary recreational facilities and opportunities in the County.
The County Park system shall consist of a balance of Neighborhood, Community and
Regional Parks.
Objectives
• The County will coordinate with local jurisdictions in the location, acquisition and
development of parkland to avoid duplication.
• Cooperation with special interest groups such as historical societies, preservation groups,
and non-profit organizations, etc., will be emphasized to serve the dual purpose of resource
conservation and parkland acquisition.
• The County will consider the implementation of regulations that would require parkland
dedication by developers of major residential subdivisions in the County. Alternatives to
requiring a dedicated amount of land could be tax incentives, fee reductions, or partial
donations with some fee simple acquisition made by the County.
• Joint use agreements between the Board of Education and municipal officials (where
appropriate) should continue to be established and refined to make all County schools
1%1%0%
69%
1%
25%
3%
Public Recreation Lands in
Washington County (32,624.94 Acres)
City of Hagerstown
Higher Education
Private
State of Maryland
Municipalities
Federal
Washington County
Figure 3: Public Recreation Lands in Washington County, MD
15
available for recreation use.
Locate recreational facilities for the convenience and benefit of the most people.
Objectives
• Locate parks and recreational facilities based on a site selection process which includes
population distribution, transportation accessibility, anticipated growth as projected in the
Comprehensive Plan for the County and which is responsive to the physical requirements
of the development program.
• Whenever practical, link parklands and open space by a system of pedestrian/bicycle trails,
greenways, and/or waterways.
Provide a safe and secure environment for the users of the County Parkland System.
Objectives
• Whenever practical, walkways, trails and parking areas should be well lit to deter illicit
activity; emergency call boxes should be installed in remote areas of parks to assist patrons
in case of an emergency.
• Local law enforcement officials should be included in the development of new parkland
facilities to provide insight into potential hazards.
• Playground equipment shall be installed to factory specifications, labeled with
recommended age ranges and safety information should be displayed within the area of the
playground equipment to inform its users of proper usage.
• Conduct a review to determine the condition of existing park and recreational facilities and
their compliance with generally accepted standards.
Coordinate recreational programming to meet the diversified needs of County citizens.
Objectives
• Devise County recreational programs to meet the needs of the public and support
organized recreation leagues.
• Provide central coordination and direction of organized recreational programs to avoid
duplication of services and facilitate the common use of all available resources.
• Provide recreational opportunities for all ages, sexes, abilities, and socio-economic groups.
Provide an economic strategy for acquisition, construction, operation and maintenance of a centrally located multi-use facility.
Objectives
• Create a design for a multi-use facility based on citizen needs and projected uses determined
through studies of similar facilities located in areas demographically like Washington
County.
• Pursue "sharing" or "host" operation and/or maintenance agreements with special interest
groups, leagues, and other organizations.
16
• Inventory possible sites and prioritize by accessibility, size, purchase price and site-specific
costs of development.
In support of the goals and objectives for parks and recreation planning, the Washington County
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board has also adopted specific policies to clarify and strengthen the
decision-making process for the use and development of County Parks:
1. Recreational facilities should be designed to competition standards to attract league and
tournament use.
2. Scheduling and staff support of County recreational facilities should allow for maximum use
by groups and organized leagues. Care should be taken to ensure that the needs of the
public are also met.
3. Open Space funds should be allocated to projects large enough in scope to benefit a wider
spectrum of users.
4. Municipalities and organizations requesting County assistance should submit applications
with sufficient information to allow the Parks Board to compare and prioritize projects.
5. A revolving loan fund should be considered to provide low interest loans for municipal
recreation projects.
6. Maximum public use should be made of recreation facilities at all public-school sites.
Supervision and maintenance assistance should be provided to the Board of Education by
the Board of County Commissioners to implement this policy.
State Goals for Parks and Recreation
As mentioned many times already within this document, parks and recreational facilities are a
cooperative effort among numerous partners including the public, private conservation organizations, and
other governmental organizations. Below are the goals adopted by the State of Maryland about parks
and recreation facilities, as well as a short explanation of how the County’s goals complement those of
the State.
• Make a variety of quality recreational environments and opportunities readily accessible
to all of its citizens and thereby contribute to their physical and mental well-being.
Washington County parks provide a wide range of environments and facilities which are
located throughout the County. Programs offered by the Recreation Department provide
opportunities for all ages and skill levels.
• Recognize and strategically use parks and recreation facilities as amenities to make
communities, counties and the State more desirable places to live, work, play, and visit.
Aside from the natural beauty evident in the various parks, they offer access for aquatic
activities, music appreciation, and as the location for cultural and social events.
• Use State investment in parks, recreation, and open space to complement and mutually
support the broader goals and objectives of local comprehensive/master plans. County
use of State and Federal funds has coordinated directly with the Comprehensive Plan for
Washington County, and in support of the plans of the various municipalities who have
received the funds.
• To the greatest degree feasible, ensure that recreational land and facilities for local
17
populations are conveniently located relative to population centers, are accessible
without reliance on the automobile, and help to protect natural open spaces and
resources. Park sites with a larger variety of facilities are situated near population centers.
Parks whose main attraction is based on natural amenities are, by their nature, often located
at a distance from developed areas. County and State highways are well maintained in these
areas and offer convenient vehicular access; many are also well suited for access by bicycle.
• Complement infrastructure and other public investments and priorities in existing
communities and areas planned for growth through investment in neighborhood and
community parks and facilities. Washington County has supported new parkland
acquisition and improvements in existing parks in the municipalities through a
disproportionate use of open space funds over the past few years.
• Continue to protect recreational open space and resource lands at a rate that equals or
exceeds the rate that land is developed at a statewide level. The projections for population
growth currently being promulgated in the update of the Comprehensive Plan for the County,
when factored against parkland acquisition plans currently in process, show that
Washington County will continue to exceed the required ratio for the period covered by the
Comprehensive Plan update.
Maryland Project Green Classrooms (Maryland Partnership for Children in Nature)
The Maryland Project Green Classrooms project is a renewal and reaffirmation of former
Governor O’Malley’s Maryland Partnership for Children in Nature. It is a public-private partnership
intended to provide opportunities for children to learn more about their local environment and develop
their environmental literacy. According to the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, “The initiative
serves as an advisory body, working collectively across multiple disciplines and public and private sectors
to identify gaps and barriers, and make recommendations to decision-makers regarding solutions that will
bring about change in the areas of environmental literacy, nearby nature, and career pathways for youth.”
Washington County has also fostered the development of environmental literacy through the
operation of the Fairview Outdoor Education Center. Since 1979 the Board of Education has provided the
opportunity for all 5th grade students to spend a full week at the center to get a hands-on experience with
environmental literacy programs. In addition to this program, numerous other middle and high school
classrooms participate in sporadic field visits learning about stream health and restoration, forest stand
ecology, and wildlife research.
Program Implementation
To support parkland acquisition and park development Washington County uses various methods
including public funding, land use regulations, and purchase of property to achieve the goals and meet
the needs of the community. These methods are meant to accompany existing State and Federal
programs in the County to provide a well-rounded funding plan.
Implementation of Previous Plan
Since the adoption of the 2012 LPPRP the County has made progress toward meeting the goals and
recommendations of that Plan. Set out within the adopted 2012 Plan were five primary recommendations
established to guide local decisions regarding the improvement of the local park system. A list of these
18
recommendations and an analysis of progress are listed below.
1. Participation Survey – The previous plan recognized a deficiency in the usage of outdated
Statewide surveys to analyze the efficiency of the local park system and recommended
conducting a more in depth, local survey for the next plan update. A survey was developed by
the County Parks and Advisory Board with Staff input as to what data would be beneficial to
updating our plan and evaluating the effectiveness of our existing programs and facilities. The
survey was then put on the County website in early 2016 and was left open for six months. The
survey received over 400 responses and served as a large part of the public outreach efforts for
this document. A summary of the results is included in Appendix C of this document.
2. Joint Use of School Facilities – The County has previously recognized an opportunity to partner
with the local Board of Education to oversize gymnasiums as part of new school construction.
Because the gymnasiums are larger than required by basic standards, the County provides
additional funding to school construction costs. In return the Board of Education allows the
County to use the facilities for after school, weekend, and summer recreation programs. This
partnership has been successful with several schools including Maugansville Elementary, Ruth
Ann Monroe Elementary, and Jonathan Hager Elementary all including an oversized gymnasium
for these programs. Currently the Board of Education is in the design phase of replacing
Sharpsburg Elementary in the southern portion of the County. As with previous plans the
gymnasium for the new schools is being designed to be oversized.
3. Bicycle and Pedestrian Activities – Bicycle and pedestrian opportunities have continually been
a priority for the County. The positive impact on the health and connectivity of a community is
only one of the many benefits of having these types of facilities located in an efficient and safe
manner for citizen access.
Since adoption of the last Plan, the City of Hagerstown has made
extensive progress in implementing new bicycle routes around the
City. In 2014 the City was honored by the League of American
Bicyclists by being designated as a bronze level bicycle friendly
community. The City has also made improvements to their Hub City
Bike Loop; a 10-mile loop around the City that utilizes both on-street
bike lanes and multi-use paths to connect several points of interest.
Both the City and the County have pursued grant programs such as
Safe Routes to School and Transportation Alternatives Program to upgrade and/or install new
sidewalks around several schools that have a large proportion of students who walk to school
each day. Examples include areas surrounding Bester Elementary, Salem Avenue Elementary,
and Lincolnshire Elementary. This recommendation is continued into this update.
19
4. Greenways/Rail Trails/Water Trails – Water trails have seen some progress since the last plan.
The County has partnered with the Maryland Department of Natural Resources to work with
private property owners to provide access to waterways such as the Antietam and
Conococheague Creeks. This
partnership has been somewhat
successful, but challenges remain
in obtaining easements for access
over private property. One success
story has been the Kiwanis Park
located within the City of
Hagerstown. The Kiwanis Club
donated land adjacent the
Antietam Creek and installed an
access ramp for access to the
waterway and provide other
recreational opportunities.
There is currently one established rail trail in Washington County; the Western Maryland Rail
Trail. This facility has continued to gain in popularity since its initial establishment. The State
continues to seek funding to extend the rail trail over Sideling Hill Creek into Alleghany County.
There is a second potential area that has been proposed as rail trail in the past; the Civil War
Rail Trail (aka Weverton/Roxbury Rail Trail). This area is an abandoned CSX rail bed that was
purchased by the State of Maryland. No progress has been made on further development of
this facility.
The County continues to look for ways to provide greenway connections in and around the
Urban Growth Area, but opportunities have been limited due to subdued development since
the recent recession.
5. Recreation Centers – Through public input this project continues to be a long-term goal of the
LPPRP. Progress has been made since the previous plan in the form of a new Senior Center
located on the west side of Hagerstown. The center has been well received and is already
getting requests for expansion.
A multi-use recreation center has also been a continued request from local citizens.
Washington County Staff is currently evaluating potential locations and amenities for a multi-
use recreation center. The City of Hagerstown has also made progress in looking at such a
facility. Approval has been given to complete a feasibility for such a facility in the City.
Planning
As with most aspects of planning for future growth, parks, recreation and open space needs are
evaluated as part of the Comprehensive Plan for the County. The goals, objectives, and recommendations
in the Plan relating to these areas of interest are then refined and expanded upon in this document. In
the currently adopted Plan, there is emphasis placed on providing “recreational locations and sites that
will create the opportunity to pursue various active and passive leisure activities.”2 More specific
2 2002 Washington County Comprehensive Plan; Chapter 2 Goals and Objectives, page 13.
20
recommendations to implement this goal are scattered in different sections of the Plan which shows how
diverse and important parks, recreation, and open space facilities are in the overall health of a community.
Comprehensive Plan Recommendations relating to parks, recreation and open space are as follows:
Chapter 4: Economic Development
• Infrastructure Improvements: Target infrastructure improvements such as road widening to
areas where there is a need to facilitate the movement of farm equipment or to facilitate
recreational or heritage tourism promotion.
Chapter 5: Transportation Element
• Continued development of an urban sidewalk system on State roads utilizing the State
Highway Administration’s statewide sidewalk program should remain a priority.
• Linkage between greenways and facilities for bicycle and pedestrian movement need to
optimize the use of these resources.
Chapter 8: Environmental Resource Management
• A needs assessment should be done to see if more swimming facilities are needed in the
western and southern portions of the County.
• Assessments should be done along local waterways to determine the possibility of adding
more boat launches along the smaller waterways for non-motorized boating.
• Specific recommendations for recreational water facilities promoting swimming, boating
and fishing should be incorporated in future Land Preservation and Recreation Plan updates.
Chapter 9: Community Facilities
• Interconnectivity, accessibility, and safety should be foremost among the guiding principles
for the detailed study necessary to establish specific greenway trail locations.
• A variety of recreation facilities and programs should be offered to citizens in the County
regardless of sex, age, or race. Both public and private recreation service providers should
coordinate to the extent possible to insure efficiency of services and to avoid duplication.
Chapter 10: Historic and Cultural Resources
• If an opportunity arises, consider development of a County park with historical aspects or
theme or incorporate historic resources into an existing park where available and
appropriate.
Land Acquisition and Facility Development
Land acquisition and facility development activities are implemented through various funding
programs such as Program Open Space (POS), excise tax, and general fund revenues from the County.
Excise tax and general fund money is budgeted through the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) adopted
by the Board of County Commissioners.
In the County’s FY 2018-2027 CIP, $1,173,900 was budgeted for Parks and Recreation projects.
The following table shows the funding allocations.
21
Budget
Year
FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 Future
Black Rock Equip.
Replacement Program $560,666 $5,666 $51,000 $52,000 $53,000 $54,000 $55,000 $56,000 $234,000
North Central County Park $93,000 $93,000
Regional Park Equip.
Replacement $133,000 $41,000 $92,000
Chestnut Grove Park,
Overlay Parking Lot $42,000 $42,000
Tennis Court Resurfacing $179,300 $117,300 $20,000 $21,000 $21,000
Ag Center Land Acquisition,
Development $156,000 $51,000 $52,000 $53,000
Marty Snook Park Sun
Shades $10,000 $10,000
Parks and Recreation Totals $1,173,966 $163,966 $224,000 $167,000 $127,000 $54,000 $55,000 $56,000 $327,000
Ten Year Capital Program
Parks and Recreation
Washington County Capital Improvement Program 2018-2027
Prior
ApprovalTotalProject
Table 5: Parks and Recreation Department Capital Budget (2018-2027) for Washington County, MD
The Capital Improvement Plan reflects a response to the concerns and desires reflected in the
Park Survey, tempered by economic reality. Acquisition remains a priority but is limited by fiscal
constraint. Therefore, the primary approach of the Parks and Recreation budget is to provide an
aggressive repair and renovation schedule to keep existing facilities at a level which maintains the high
degree of satisfaction reported by current users.
Traditionally, POS funding has been primarily allocated to the local municipalities for
improvement to their park systems. The reason for this policy is based in the reality that there are higher
population densities in these areas and the funds could enhance a larger pool of County citizens.
22
Sponsor Project
Project
Cost
Request
Development
Approved
Acquisition Approved
Boonsboro Boonsboro Park Trail Phase II $110,000 $100,000 $50,000
Arts & Entertainment Walking Trail,
Acquisition $100,000 $100,000 $50,000 $50,000
Park Amentities, Benches, Picnic
Tables, Trash Receptacles $40,000 $36,000 $26,486
Fairgrounds Park - Indoor Recreation
Area $125,000 $36,000 $36,000
Kiwanis Park - Utilities $30,000 $27,000 $27,000
Funkstown Land Acquisition $782,898 $39,250 $62,764 $62,764
Kirkwood/Widmeyer Park Pedestrian
Trail $46,000 $41,400 $25,769
Kirkwood Park Pavilion $95,425 $85,883 $50,000
Kirkwood Park Pavilion $95,425 $35,000 $35,000
Kirkwood Concrete Floor $55,054 $49,549 $49,549
Kirkwood Park Dug-outs $9,484 $6,984 $6,984
Kirkwood Softball Field $4,100 $3,674 $3,674
Kirkwood Park Connector Acquisition $41,650 $37,485 $37,485
Kirkwood Park Pedestrial Trail $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
Smithsburg Veterans Park Utility Development $30,000 $27,000 $27,000
Williamsport Byron Park Sidewalk Project Phase II $40,000 $30,000 $30,000
HCC Soccer field renovations $68,799 $55,039 $55,039
Ag Center Drainage Improvements $20,000 $18,000 $18,000
Tennis Court Resurfacing $41,000 $37,000 $37,000
Doubs Wood, Arts Pavilion Roof
Replacement $27,000 $24,000 $24,000
Pavilion Apron Replacement,
Various Parks $20,000 $18,000 $18,000
Marty Snook Pool, Return Grate
Replacement $31,000 $27,000 $27,000
Totals $1,837,835 $859,264 $112,764 $721,750
FY 2017 POS Allocation: $451,058
(All other funding shown is from previous POS funding years)
FY 2017 Approved Program Open Space Projects
Washington County
Hagerstown
Hancock
Washington County
Regulatory Land Development Ordinances
Another tool used by the County in obtaining parks and open space areas is through regulatory
documents such as the Subdivision Ordinance and the Zoning Ordinance. These documents provide rules
and guidance for land development in the County. As part of these ordinances, there are opportunities
for developers to be flexible in the design of their project through options such as cluster plans and mixed-
use developments. The purpose of these flexible design districts is to incentivize the allocation of open
space areas within the development by allowing smaller lot sizes and/or increased density. This promotes
a win-win scenario for the community and the developer by creating recreational open space area at no
value loss to the developer.
23
Joint Use Agreements
Coordinating recreation and education activities at schools is an important part of the facilities
plan. Utilizing the buildings and surrounding grounds as joint
school-recreation centers provides indoor and outdoor
facilities for neighborhood activities and interaction and allows
the center to serve as a focal point for education, recreation
and related activities for the surrounding community or town.
This multiple use concept is strongly endorsed in the
Comprehensive Plan for the County and is consistent with
several of the State Visions discussed in the Introduction.
In practice, the County and the Board of Education
work together to plan recreational facilities in the early stages
of designing school sites. During the design phase, Staff from
each organization work closely together to size both indoor
and outdoor facilities to make the investment as efficient and fiscally responsible as possible. Once the
facilities are constructed, the School Board has joint use agreements with the Parks and Recreation
Department regarding tennis courts and track use and maintenance and utilizes a School Facility Use
Agreement to help coordinate use of buildings and scheduling of fields on school property.
Inventory of Existing Public Parks and Recreation Facilities
Park and open space meet a variety of recreational needs of residents and visitors. Parks and open
spaces can also be established to preserve, conserve, and manage natural resources and habitats. The
definitions below demonstrate the difference between areas used for recreation vs. those used for
resource management.
Recreation Land: Land and/or related water areas that support recreation as a primary use. This
land may also contain cultural, agricultural, or other resources related or incidental to its recreational
purpose. According to MD DNR there are two sub-categories of recreational land:
a. Non-resource based recreational land: Land on which the primary recreational
activities do not depend on the presence of natural resources. This land supports
activities that can occur in the absence of intact natural resources and are generally
more dependent on-site improvements than on natural resources (i.e. public
swimming pools, basketball courts, and baseball fields).
b. Natural Resource based recreational land: Land on which the primary recreation
activities depend on the presences of natural resources. Activities generally do not
occur without the presence of natural resources (i.e. public beaches, backpacking,
camping, and hiking).
Resource Land: Land and/or related water areas for which natural resource protection,
conservation, or management is of primary importance. This land may support agricultural, recreational,
economic, or other uses to the extent that they do not conflict with protection or preservation of the
natural resource.
Photo 6: Youth Soccer game sponsored by
Washington County Recreation
24
To further refine the classification of lands in the parks system, recreation and resource lands are
classified as follows:
Neighborhood Park: The primary function is to serve as the recreational and social focus of a
neighborhood. They are developed for both active and passive activities, accommodating a wide variety
of age groups. Sites are generally small, in the two to five-acre range, and are usually within one half mile
or less of potential users.
Community Park: The purpose is larger and broader than neighborhood parks. Their focus is on
meeting the recreational needs of several neighborhoods or larger sections of the community as well as
preserving unique landscapes, open spaces, and natural resources. Sites can range in size from ten to fifty
acres depending on rural or urban settings and the number of potential users. These parks are generally
intensely developed to provide both passive and active recreational opportunities to potential users
within two to three miles.
County/Regional Park: Like the community park, the focus is on recreation as well as preserving
natural landscapes, open spaces, and natural resources. Sites are generally fifty acres or more and provide
both active and passive recreational opportunities to potential users throughout the County and/or
region.
School Recreational Land: These are sites owned and maintained by the Board of Education and
serve to provide for the school’s recreational needs as well as limited community needs. The school
recreational land consists of formal athletic fields and playground equipment with the primary focus on
scholastic sports and in school recreational activities. An agreement between the Board of County
Commissioners and the Board of Education allows additional funds to be provided to build an expanded
gym, storage areas, recreation rooms and offices to support Recreation Centers which are open to the
public when school is not in session. These Centers are managed by the County’s Department of Parks
and Recreation.
State Park: Areas with natural resources or geographic, topographic, or physiographic
characteristics that are suitable for recreational development and use. These areas are managed with the
primary objective of providing outdoor recreational opportunities for the public in a natural setting.
Special Use Park: Areas that are generally oriented toward a single purpose use such as public
golf courses, including protection of unique features such as historic or cultural sites, stream access,
wetland areas, and habitat management areas.
25
Map 4: Governmentally Owned and Maintained Parks in Washington County, MD
Most of non-resource based recreational land is contained within County and municipal parks.
While the municipalities focus on pocket parks and neighborhood level park areas, the County focuses
more on community and regional park resources. There are also several State and Federal Parks that
serve a dual purpose of both recreation area and natural resource protection area. This provides a diverse
network of park and recreation facilities for all citizens. In addition to governmentally owned park
facilities, there are several community and Ruritan parks that are privately owned but are also open to
the public in varying degrees. While not technically included within the proximity analysis due to their
privately-owned nature, it is still important to include as a resource. Map 4 illustrates the location of
County and municipal parks as well as public school recreation sites. A larger version of the parks map is
in Appendix A and includes a cross reference to the detailed inventory. A detailed inventory of recreation
land and their associated amenities are included in Appendix B.
Measuring User Demand
Public Engagement and Outreach
Typically, public engagement and outreach methods used in development of past plans included
public input meetings at several locations around the County. These meetings have proven to be
ineffective and inefficient. While a few members of the public have had valuable comments regarding
the status of our parks and recreation facilities, meetings would typically be poorly attended and would
26
devolve into tangents upon specific negative experiences that proved to have no real solution or impact
on the Plan.
To streamline our public engagement process, the County held a two-phase process that proved
to be more informative, efficient and effective than previous attempts at meaningful input in
development of the draft document. The first method of outreach was via a Stakeholder meeting held in
August 2015. The second phase of public outreach included an on-line survey marketed and distributed
throughout the County. In addition to these preliminary meetings the County will hold a public hearing
before the Board of County Commissioners to take a final round of public comment on the draft
document.
As part of the Stakeholder meetings, direct invitations were sent out to eight different stakeholder
groups within the County (see inset) that have a vested interest in parks and recreation facilities within
the County. When asked what they believe the community has done well regarding parks and recreation
facilities in the County, participants noted that they believe the County has done well with safety and
maintenance of equipment and surfaces and made a good use of limited resources.
When asked what they believe has not been done well
with existing facilities, participants commented that there is a
general lack of field space in County parks, specifically softball
and baseball fields. There were also comments that the
scheduling of facilities can be difficult due to the number of
organized leagues already contracted to use the areas. And
finally, comments were made that older sites do not fit the
current needs or design guidelines for some facilities, such as
playground areas, and that the physical arrangement of some of
the parks can limit user’s enjoyment of the areas.
When asked what the County can do to improve parks
and recreation facilities within the community participants
offered the following suggestions:
♦ Turf fields with lighting, while a high cost feature, would
take less maintenance and would generate more use and
income for the County, perhaps attracting users from
other areas, and reducing the need for citizens, teams
and clubs to leave the community for access to
more/better facilities. Planners should quantify the
numbers of residents turned away.
♦ Develop more facilities in the east, north, Williamsport
and Clear Springs areas.
♦ Obtain State and Federal money to promote trails/bike
trails and improve inter-trail connections.
♦ Explore the potential for water trails along the creeks and waterways within the County,
specifically the Antietam and Conococheague Creeks.
♦ Coordinate with Maryland State Parks to provide wider access roads and additional parking for
walking trails.
♦ Convert abandoned railroad tracks to trails.
Stakeholder Groups
• Washington County
Recreation Department
• Parks and Recreation Advisory
Board
• Convention and Visitors
Bureau
• MD Department of Natural
Resources
• National Park Service
• Appalachian Trail
Conservancy
• National Scenic Byways Group
• South Mountain Recreational
Area
27
♦ Prioritize the use of Program Open Space money.
♦ Strive to improve the maintenance/replacement budget and schedule.
♦ Base long-term plans for increased park land and facilities on projected population increases.
♦ Develop and pursue ideas for more money to replace Program Open Space money (i.e. fees, rental
rate increases).
♦ Provide more parking.
♦ Investigate the airport as a location for recreational facilities.
♦ Conduct a socio-economics analysis of areas around existing parks so that facilities can be
developed to match neighborhood needs.
♦ Offer more swimming facilities.
In addition to the directed stakeholder meetings held in August, the County developed and
marketed an on-line survey to obtain feedback from the public on the function and usage of our local park
system. One of the primary recommendations from the previous plan was for the County to develop its
own survey regarding local parks and recreation services rather than depending upon statewide surveys
and extrapolations.
The survey was broken up into three
general areas: park facilities, recreation
programs, and demographics. The questions
presented were intended to extract information
from citizens regarding their opinions on current
usage, proximity, condition, and general
comments regarding park facilities and
recreation programs in the County. The purpose
of the demographic questions was to gain
insight into who the users of local public
facilities are and whether there are patterns in
attendance/ usage. Areas were also included
within the survey for spontaneous feedback
from the respondent. A total of 435 responses
were received from the on-line survey and a full
copy of the survey questions and summary of responses is in Appendix C.
Approximately two-thirds of the survey respondents reported that they participated in some form
of County recreation program within the
past year. When queried about the types of
programs that were attended, most of the
respondents mention participation in youth
programs vs. organized youth or adult
leagues.
In comparison, a larger portion of
survey respondents reported that they have
used County parks within the last year.
Usage, Demands, and Participation Rates
Yes
67%
No
33%
QP1:Did you or members of your
family participate in Washington
County Recreation Programs during
the past year?
80%
20%
QF2: Do you or a household
member use any of the County
parks?
Yes
No
Figure 4: Survey question from public outreach survey
Figure 5: Survey question from public outreach survey
28
Parks
Most of parkland usage in Washington County comes from organized or league sports. As shown
in the chart below, five County parks are used primarily for baseball, softball, football, and soccer leagues.
By using the number of participants and the total days and weeks per year they have requested to reserve
fields, we have estimated the total individual usage.
Parks with League Play
# of
Participants
# of
Days
use per
week
Weeks
per year
Total
Individual
Uses per
league
Marty Snook Park
Hub City Softball League 105 4 24 10,080
Halfway Little League 150 6 18 16,200
PA Softball Tournaments 144 2 13 3,744
Washington County Junior Football 795 5 20 79,500
Washington County Flag Football 160 1 16 2,560
Conococheague Girls Softball 60 1 15 900
Kemps Mill Park
Washington County Girls Softball
League 500 6 24 72,000
PA Softball Tournaments 144 2 13 3,744
Clear Spring Park
Clear Spring Little League 165 6 18 17,820
Clear Spring Soccer 225 6 20 27,000
Pinesburg Softball Complex
Washington County Co-Rec League 400 4 16 25,600
Tavern League 100 2 16 3,200
Pinesburg Fall Softball League 120 2 8 1,920
PA Softball 144 2 13 3,744
Springfield School Park Site
Williamsport Youth Soccer 350 6 20 42,000
Conococheague Little League
(practice) 100 3 18 5,400
Washington County Junior Football
(practice) 100 3 20 6,000
TOTALS 3762 321,412
Table 6: Participation in league play in Washington County parks
Another way for the County to estimate usage of the parks system is through tracking of pavilion
rentals in various parks throughout the County. Typically, when pavilions are rented, the other amenities
in parks are used as well. Rentals are permitted from May 1st through October 31st. In 2016, the County
had approximately 1,076 rental requests. Based on the applications, there was an average user request
of 85 people making the total user estimate around 91,460 people.
In addition, primarily due to public requests, two dog parks have been established, one each in
29
the City of Hagerstown and the Washington County park systems. Disc golf courses have been added
adjacent to the municipal and county owned golf courses.
Due to the nature of these information gathering steps, certain predictions are possible; soccer
players want more fields, league members want facilities built to competition specifications, participants
in various programs want more offerings with a greater flexibility of time and location. Casual or non-
documented park use is difficult to determine other than on an anecdotal basis. On warm pleasant days,
the casual observer would note that the parks are full, etc.
Unmet needs were partially identified in the survey and during the public comment process
reported earlier in this document. In addition to those stated needs, the County has faced a challenge in
the level of opposition to the establishment of new rail trails, such as the Weverton Rail Trail proposed on
DNR property that would bring a new level of support for the Civil War Heritage Area.
The County development of riding trails, dog parks, and multi-use fields reflects a willingness and
ability to be responsive to changes in the public definition of recreational facilities and who provides them.
However, there is a weakness inherent in the system in the form of funding sources. As other
infrastructure priorities and needs have increased, and State-wide support funds have continued to
decrease, the expansion of parks and programs has been limited while funds are being used to maintain
the existing park system.
Recreation Programs
The trend in the provision of recreational facilities and services is towards meeting changing needs
of the public. Use rates reported as a single number reflecting the number of individual uses are
impressive, but may skew demand towards team sports in league play. Recreational programs conducted
by the County in a variety of facilities can also have the same result. In the future, some form of data
collection to show the number of different individuals utilizing the parks would be useful. The following
chart shows attendance figures for various recreation programs held throughout the County.
Attendance Numbers for Recreation Programs
ACTIVITY PARTICIPANTS
WINTER SPRING/SUMMER FALL TOTAL
YOUTH CLASSES
Giggles & Wiggles 160 (4 classes) 0 553 (4 classes) 713
Tiny Tot Soccer 264 (2 classes) 144 592 (2 classes) 1,000
Big & Little Basketball 144 0 320 464
Youth Track 138 0 72 210
Happy Feet Track 162 0 132 294
Hancock Basketball 160 0 0 160
30
Youth Karate 644 700 672 2,016
Youth Soccer 125 78 132 335
Boys HS Soccer 400 735 0 1,135
Girls HS Soccer 480 840 0 1,320
Power Play 84 0 48 132
Tennis 6-8 yr. olds 0 96 84 180
Tennis 10-14 yr. olds 0 54 66 120
Tennis 15-18 yr. olds 0 60 84 144
Pre-School Playcamp
Week 1 0 195 0 195
Pre-School Playcamp Week 2 0 195 0 195
Youth Swim Lessons 0 1,400 (49 classes) 0 1,400
Boys Basketball League 0 2,625 0 2,625
Girls Basketball League 0 2,205 0 2,205
Boys Basketball Camp 0 495 0 495
Girls HS Volleyball League 0 1,080 (Varsity & JV) 0 1,080
Volleyball Skills Clinics 264 (2 classes) 0 144 408
Elementary VB League 0 0 1,600 1,600
Middle School VB League 0 0 1,600 1,600
Youth Dance Classes 0 1,453 (15 classes) 1,681 (15 classes) 3,134
Dance Fest 0 71 0 71
Princess Party 0 0 655 655
Park @ Dark 0 0 722 722
Super Heroes Party 441 0 0 441
Rockland Woods Camp 0 620 0 620
31
Hancock Camp 0 390 0 390
Marty Snook Park 6-7 year olds 0 1,305 0 1,305
Marty Snook Park 8-9
year olds
0 2,021 0 2,021
Marty Snook Park 10-12 year olds 0 1,895 0 1,895
Maugansville ES School
Camp
0 2,130 0 2,130
Williamsport ES School Camp 0 1,895 0 1,895
ADULT CLASSES
Water Exercise/Arthritis
Aquatics
1,008 1,687 1,372 4,067
Sit Fit 48 48 48 144
Spin Fit 2,264 260 514 (2 classes) 1,038
Sassy Seniors 504 572 554 1,630
Total Fitness 4-Star
Daytime
1176 754 1064 2,994
Total Fitness 4-Star Evenings 644 442 448 1,534
Total Fitness HCC 480 260 252 992
Spin Cycling at HCC 364 442 308 1,114
Hybrid Cardio/Chisel and
Chill 1,148 (2
classes)
806 (2 classes) 1,008 (2 classes) 2,962
Rhythm Is Gonna' Get Ya' 0 0 1,008 (New
Class)
1,008
ZUMBA 3,836 (4 classes) 2,401 (4 classes) 3,164 (3 classes) 9,401
Pop Pilates 224 114 456 794
Walking Club 8,470 2,590 3,430 14,490
Adult Karate 566 420 532 1,518
Adult Volleyball League 721 0 960 1,681
Adult Ballroom 185 72 180 437
Adult Tap 208 (2 classes) 90 (2 classes) 208 (2 classes) 506
32
Adult Tennis 0 142 136 278
Adult Pick-Up Soccer 192 0 384 576
St. Patrick’s Day Races 894 0 894
Spooky Sprint 0 0 91 91
TOTALS 24,398 33,782 25,274 83454*
*Numbers do not include spectators.
Table 7: Participation for Recreation Programs in Washington County, MD
In addition to these programs, the County has also begun to focus on the recreational needs of
our senior citizens. Washington County has recently collaborated with the City of Hagerstown and the
Commission on Aging to renovate a surplus National Guard facility into a Senior Center. This facility has a
fitness center, areas for social activities, and support for meal programs. Programs are offered to enhance
the quality of life, including fitness, recreational, and learning for life programs.
Level of Service Analysis
The general purpose of a level of service analysis is to assess the supply vs. the demand of the
parkland system. The supply of parkland available to the public has been established as part of the
inventory analysis of this chapter. However, a simple listing of resources does not give an accurate
depiction of service. To provide a more accurate representation of parkland supply, a spatial analysis of
the park system has been completed. To complement the supply portion of the equation, the demand
portion of the analysis is done through a park equity evaluation.
Park Equity Analysis
The process of measuring park equity
combines GIS mapping information and census data
to provide graphic representations to assist planners
in determining the best locations for future parks. It
was developed by the State of Maryland to provide a
basic quantitative tool to help expand public access
to nature for underserved communities, by
employing national, state and local data in a
consistent and strategic manner.
Each factor is determined from census data
and given various weights to reach a combined score.
Greatest weight is given to the mean distance from
the Census Tract to park space. The scores for age and density are also given more weight. The totals are
then combined to create a Park Equity Combined Score, with the higher score reflecting the greater need.
As shown on Map 5, the areas of the greatest need are mostly within the City of Hagerstown. This
is not surprising since these are the densest residential areas in the County. The City is committed to
providing a variety of parks and open space areas for their citizen’s enjoyment. They have made great
33
progress in their endeavors to increase park and open space through recent park additions such as the
Cultural Trail, Kiwanis Park, and Terrapin Park. The City continues to seek opportunities to enhance its
park system. An example of on-going work is the acquisition of property along West Washington Street
for a new pocket park called National Road Park.
Other areas showing a medium to high need are in Census tracts north of the City and tracts along
the Virginia Avenue (US Route 11) corridor. The County has experienced moderate growth in the areas
north of the City over the last two decades. It has long been established that the County is seeking to
establish a new regional park around Marsh Pike and Leitersburg Pike. Location of the park is awaiting the
final alignment of a proposed new two-lane road that will connect Eastern Boulevard to Leitersburg Pike.
It is believed that a regional park in this area will alleviate a lot of the need in these areas.
It is also noted that there is an anomaly in the data due to the location of the State prison complex
south of the City of Hagerstown. Census data in this tract is consistently skewed due to the demographics
of these facilities.
Map 5: Park Equity Map for Washington County, MD
Strategies for meeting the goals are covered more specifically in the goals section. For the most
part, goals will be attained using Project Open Space Funds, coordination with local sports associations,
34
and fees generated by facility rentals.
Park Proximity Analysis
Using the County’s Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data, a spatial analysis was conducted
to determine the proximity of County and municipal parks to the public. For this analysis, catchment areas
of one, three, and five miles were mapped to determine if there are areas for improvement. A five-mile
catchment area was determined to be the furthest acceptable distance from a park because it represents
an approximate 10-15-minute drive or reasonable bike ride. The one-mile catchment area corresponds to
a reasonable walking distance. As shown on Map 6, all of Washington County is within a five-mile
proximity of a State, County, or municipal park.
Map 6: Park Proximity Map for Washington County, MD
In addition to a countywide evaluation of park proximity, a more focused analysis was made in
the areas surrounding the Urban Growth Area. Areas in and around the City of Hagerstown and the larger
area of the UGA show a heavy concentration of areas of need on the park equity analysis. Catchment
areas were reduced to one-quarter, one-half, and one-mile distances within the Urban Growth Area. The
reason for the reduced catchment areas is to evaluate proximity of parks to those areas determined to
have a higher need for parklands by the park equity analysis.
35
The proximity analysis of the UGA (shown as an inset on Map 6) shows a high concentration of
parks in and around the boundaries of the City of Hagerstown and the Towns of Williamsport and
Funkstown. This illustrates the commitment of the City, towns, and County to provide park facilities in the
areas of greatest need.
This analysis also illustrates the larger distance to park facilities as you move further away from
the core of the City of Hagerstown. Some of this is to be expected due to reduced residential density
further from the urban core. However, when compared to the park equity analysis, there are areas outside
the defined catchment areas for County owned lands in the northern portion of the UGA. There are
concentrations of residential development along the Maugans Avenue/Long Meadow Road corridor that
are outside catchment areas as compared to other dense residential areas in the UGA. There are
mitigating circumstances.
The oldest residential growth in this area can be seen in the Maugansville rural village. The rural
village of Maugansville long pre-dates zoning regulations with most homes being built in the early 1900s.
While never incorporated as a municipal organization the village functions similar to a small town.
Services within the area include a post office, fire company, ambulance service, elementary school, and
little league baseball organization.
In the heart of the village is approximately 30 acres of land being used for parks and recreation
purposes. Currently, 6.5 acres of land is owned by the Maugansville Ruritan that is available as a
community park. The park is privately owned but is available to the general public for use at any time
without fee. The park includes two tennis courts, playground areas, a pavilion and a baseball field used
by the Maugansville Little league. The Ruritan property also contains a 6,000 square foot building often
used for community events. The Little League organization also owns approximately 3 acres of land
adjacent to the Ruritan that houses one baseball field. Immediately adjacent to the Ruritan Community
park is Maugansville Elementary School.
In 2008 the Board of Education (with funding from the Board of County Commissioners) razed the
old Maugansville Elementary School and replaced it with a larger and more modern school on land
adjacent to the old school property. The relocation of the school and razing of the old structure allowed
for more open space near the Ruritan parcel as well as the Little League parcel. There is currently a joint
use agreement held by the Ruritan [in support of the Little League] with the Board of Education to build
and maintain several baseball fields on BOE property. In addition, the Ruritan and the Little League have
a joint use agreement for another baseball field on Ruritan property that Maugansville Little League uses
as part of their operations. The Board of Education and Washington County also have a joint use
agreement to facilitate recreation programs in the school, a result of contributions of POS funding to the
new school construction.
When viewed as part of the parks proximity analysis, this area is just outside of a one-mile
catchment area because there is no County owned park land in the vicinity of the rural village. However,
as stated above, there is other governmentally owned lands in the form of Maugansville Elementary
School that is being used in conjunction with other privately-owned land to serve the needs of the
community. Since there is currently no County owned land in this vicinity it will remain a priority area for
acquisition should an opportunity arise but is not considered a deficiency.
With regard to the Maugans Avenue and Longmeadow Road corridor, residential development
36
has occurred in more recent decades. Maugans Ave from its intersection with Interstate 81 to its
intersection with US 11 (Pennsylvania Avenue) has experienced residential development in the 1950s and
1960s. Since then the majority of development in this area has been commercial in nature and therefore
not created a need for additional parkland acquisition.
In contrast, Longmeadow Road from US 11 to Maryland 60 (Leitersburg Pike) has experienced a
great deal of residential development in the last several decades. The County has long term plans to
locate a new regional park in the vicinity of Leitersburg Pike and Marsh Pike which will provide additional
recreation opportunities in this area. The intent to provide a park in this location has been recognized
since the mid 1980’s and a formal agreement has been in place since 2009. The property will be secured
through a 99-year lease with a purchase option. It will be a regional park, approximately 90 acres, and
contain multiple ball and soccer fields, pavilions, playgrounds and restrooms. Development of the park
will commence after the completion of the Eastern Boulevard Extended Road Project projected for
construction in 2024. Park development funding is contained in the adopted 2019 Capital Improvement
Program. This park development will meet the needs of the immediate neighborhood and region long
into the future.
Another area showing a moderate need for additional park facilities is near Sharpsburg Pike, south
of the City of Hagerstown. This area is shown as having a medium to low-medium need based on the park
equity analysis, but recent heavy residential development in this corridor will likely continue over the
short term; and, therefore, drive more demand for additional park facilities.
One other area on the map that shows a low proximity to park facilities is in a large area west of
the City of Hagerstown. This area that is designated along the Greencastle Pike and Salem Avenue
corridors has been designated specifically by the Comprehensive Plan for the County as a commercial and
employment center area. Zoning in this area has been comprehensively rezoned to achieve this goal.
Based on these land use goals, this area is not being targeted for residential development; and, therefore,
should not see a high demand for park facilities.
Access Analysis
Another aspect to level of service that was measured as part of the development of this plan was
to evaluate opportunities for access to various recreational activities. As part of the public survey and
public information meetings, the most common recreational uses for citizens is walking/hiking/biking,
picnicking and general enjoyment of nature and water related activities
(boating/swimming/canoeing/kayaking).
County GIS data was again used to map proximity of natural features as well as access to trail and
water access. Due to the rural nature of Washington County, it would be expected that most participants
of these activities will travel by automobile to access recreation opportunities, so a five-mile catchment
area was used to depict a reasonable (10-15 minute) drive to access these features. Also, included on the
maps is a three mile and one-mile catchment area that shows a reasonable biking or walking distance
from said features.
♦ Proximity to Natural Areas. As shown on Map 7, most of the County has reasonable
access to a variety of natural resources. There is an area north of the City of Hagerstown
that shows a gap in service for these types of amenities. While there may be a small gap
in this area, it is important to note that this is the general location of the Hagerstown
37
Regional Airport. While not mutually exclusive to one another, there are some
compatibility issues with having large natural areas near the Airport. Most of the
incompatibility stems from wildlife habitats created as part of natural areas. For airport
operations, especially in rural areas such as Washington County, wildlife is a significant
hazard that can be disruptive or even dangerous to airport operations. For purposes of
this analysis, natural areas are generally considered to be State and Federal parks in the
County.
Map 7: Proximity to Natural Access for Washington County, MD
♦ Proximity to Water Access. As shown on map 8, the majority of the County has
reasonable access to various water features. The primary source of water access in the
County is the Potomac River. Nearly 80 miles of river shoreline are contained in
Washington County and there are numerous public access points along its length. In
addition, there are nine primary tributaries that drain into the Potomac River that are
either all or a portion of which are navigable. While there are several existing public
access points along these tributaries, the County Parks Department has been
continuously seeking opportunities for additional access points specifically along the
Antietam and Conococheague Creeks.
38
The County’s partnership with the Maryland Public Access, Water Trails, and Recreation
Planning program has been used to build upon existing water trails designated by the
State of Maryland. The most prominent water trail is the Upper Potomac water trail
which spans from Shepherdstown, WV to Cumberland, MD. This trail has been
designated as an invaluable resource for paddlers, boaters, and anglers. In addition to
the Potomac River trail the State has also designated portions of the Conococheague and
Antietam Creeks as important water trails in the County. Map 8 below shows the
locations of designated water trails and hiking trails in Washington County.
Map 8: Proximity to Water Access for Washington County, MD
39
Table 9: Trail and Water Access for Washington County, MD
♦ Proximity to Trail Access. As shown on Map 9, much of the County is located within a
reasonable distance of trail access. There is a gap noted in the northern portion of the
County from Indian Springs to Smithsburg. There are several factors that have led to this
gap in service that again relates to the compatibility of the land use policies in the area.
First, as noted in the section above discussing proximity to natural areas, the Hagerstown
Regional Airport is in a portion of the gap area. Trails are not necessarily incompatible
with airport operations but typically do not attract interest from the public either due to
noise issues and lack of natural areas. The other areas along the Mason-Dixon Line, both
east and west of the airport, are areas that have been delineated as Priority Preservation
Areas. These are specifically targeted for agricultural land preservation programs on
private land. Map 9 above shows the location of several recognized hiking trails in the
County.
40
Map 10: Proximity to Trail Access Map in Washington County, MD
Conclusions
According to the Park Equity Analysis the areas of highest need for park access are located in and around
the City of Hagerstown. This is not surprising due to the population densities found in these areas. When
compared to the park proximity analysis there is a graphic correlation between the location of parks and
where the demand would be most critical. According to the park proximity analysis the majority of the
Urban Growth Area is within a 3-mile radius in general of a County or municipal park. When looking at
proximity to specific amenities within the park system such as access to water trails, access to
hiking/walking trails, and access to natural areas, the County appears to meet the needs of most County
citizens by having these amenities located within a 5-mile radius or less. There are some gaps that begin
to appear for some of the amenities mostly in the northern portion of the UGA. Some of this gap is caused
by the location of the Hagerstown Regional Airport along US 11 north of Hagerstown. While there are
some opportunities for recreation within the area there is also a conscious effort to minimize the potential
for conflicting land uses. For example, there is a large gap in the airport vicinity for natural areas. Because
of recent FAA regulations regarding wildlife attractants to airport facilities, the County has adjusted some
our land use polices to limit this conflict. Included is limiting the amount of natural resources such as
41
water features (ponds, stormwater management areas, etc.) and forested areas.
CIP funding and POS grants have continued to focus on parklands located within the UGA. Rescission of
POS funding in the early 2000s has severely limited and shifted funding to focus on maintenance and
system preservation rather than acquisition and expansion of services. As shown previously in the CIP
funding, expenditures for park and recreation uses are focused on the better attended facilities such as
Marty Snook Park, Doub’s Woods Park, and the Agricultural Education Center (see results of question QF5
of the parks survey for attendance responses).
Priorities and Recommendations
Parkland Acquisition
Continue to pursue acquisition of additional parkland for active and passive recreational
activities. Specifically, an analysis of park proximity and equity show potential gaps in service
near:
Pennsylvania Avenue extending north to Longmeadow Road
Marsh Pike and Leitersburg Pike
Maugansville Rural Village
Sharpsburg Pike corridor from I-70 south to Lappans Road
Cascade/Pen Mar/Ft. Ritchie (taking advantage of redevelopment in the area)
Jefferson Boulevard/Robinwood Drive
Continue to develop strategies to acquire additional land and/or financial support for park
acquisition and development during the development review process. Strategies could
include land dedication during development review, incentives for land donation, land
swaps, and/or impact fees.
Evaluate existing governmental properties for potential adaptive reuse that could meet
recreational needs. For example, lands at the airport and closed landfills could provide areas
for recreational activities that would not deter from the principle purpose of the property.
Greenways/Rail Trails/Water Trails
Depending on location, some local abandoned rail corridors could have potential for
conversion to accessible walking and bicycling paths, with possible links to adjacent states.
Discussion in recent years has focused on the abandoned CSX rail line extending from
Hagerstown to Weverton Cliffs. The State of Maryland purchased the property in the mid-
1990s and has offered the County an opportunity to implement a rail-trail facility within the
right-of-way. There is a divide between the owners of properties adjacent to the railroad
right-of-way who see this plan as a potential threat and other citizens in the County who see
this as a potential benefit. More study and public input needs to be completed before
additional progress can be made.
42
Continue to work with local land owners with waterway frontage to create possible areas
for public access. A recent donation by a local non-profit organization, Kiwanis, along
Antietam Creek has provided one such example of this initiative.
Other conceptual greenways routes identified on the Comprehensive Plan Special Programs
Map should be prioritized and evaluated for easement, connectivity, dedication, and public
accessibility potential.
Joint Use of School Facilities
Coordinating recreation and education activities at schools is an important part of the facilities
plan. Utilizing the buildings and surrounding grounds as joint school-recreation centers provides
indoor and outdoor facilities for neighborhood activities and interaction and allows the center to
serve as a focal point for education, recreation and related activities for the surrounding
community or town. This multiple use concept is strongly endorsed in the Comprehensive Plan
for the County and is consistent with several of the State Visions discussed in the Introduction.
There has also been a history of success of joint use facilities. Recommendations to improve upon
this practice include:
Continue to execute joint use agreements between the Board of Education and the Parks
and Recreation Department regarding tennis courts and track use and maintenance.
Utilize a School Facility Use Agreement to help coordinate use of buildings and scheduling
of fields on school property.
Design of new schools should include availability of services such as restrooms and water
fountains to the participants and spectators. This includes access to these facilities for
indoor and outdoor recreation programs. Security measures to restrict access of off-hour
participants to the rest of the facility should also be a priority in design.
Continue to coordinate with the Board of Education, where appropriate, on oversizing of
gymnasiums to provide regulation size courts for various indoor sports such as volleyball
and basketball. This has proven to be a practical and cost-effective method for helping to
meet the needs of recreational demands.
Bicycling and Pedestrian Safety and Health
Washington County has an excellent road network, historic towns, points of interest, and a scenic,
pastoral landscape which attracts recreational bicyclists locally, and from nearby states and
metropolitan areas. The C & O Canal towpath and the Western MD Rail Trail are additional tourist
attractions and make the County a well-known destination for bicycle tourists. In addition, the
City of Hagerstown has implemented an aggressive Bicycle Master Plan that has garnered them a
Bronze Level Bicycle Friendly Community designation by the League of American Bicyclist. To
improve upon our bicycle and pedestrian facilities the following recommendations are offered:
Continue to work with the Hagerstown/Eastern Panhandle Metropolitan Planning
43
Organization to implement the recommendations of their recently approved Regional
Bicycle Plan.
Continue to seek funding opportunities through grant programs such as the
Transportation Alternatives Program, Safe Routes to School Program, Federal Lands
Access Program, etc.
Coordinate among school, health, planning, and engineering officials, as well as
community betterment groups, to contribute to the awareness of the many benefits of
improving facilities and access to these facilities thereby increasing opportunities for
bicycling and walking.
Work with the Convention and Visitors Bureau to promote local biking events and County
bicycle facilities.
Community Recreation Centers
Washington County and the City of Hagerstown share a long-range goal of providing a
regional recreation complex (to possibly include an indoor swimming pool, gymnasium,
multi-purpose rooms, and outdoor fields) located within the Urban Growth Area.
Further discussion and study should be conducted to decide what types of recreational
centers (i.e. aquatics, tennis, multi-purpose, etc.) would be most beneficial to the
County citizens and identify opportunities for City/County cooperation.
Washington County opened a new Senior Center in 2015. The new facility is being used
to near capacity and requests have been made to expand. Future growth of the facility
should be evaluated for potential expansion.
Participation Survey
During the update of this document, the County developed and implemented a survey to
determine the needs of citizens. While the survey was a good start and provided helpful insight
and information, it should be updated every few years and redistributed to ensure that
changing demands are being met.
44
NATURAL RESOURCE LAND CONSERVATION
Executive Summary
Washington County is fortunate to
have a significant amount of natural resources.
Bounded on the east and west by portions of
the Appalachian mountain chain, scenic vistas
are plentiful. Fairview and Sideling Hill
mountains to the west and South Mountain to
the east provide important hardwood forests,
animal habitats and opportunities for
recreation. The fertile soils of the Great
Hagerstown Valley provide high quality
productive soils for agricultural uses.
The valley also contains two primary
stream systems; the Conococheague and
Antietam Creeks. These streams are used for
public water supply, agricultural irrigation, and recreational uses. The Potomac River bounds the County
on its southern border. With one of the longest areas of shoreline along the Potomac, Washington County
citizens have ample access to water recreation activities. It is also the primary drinking water source for
the City of Hagerstown and surrounding urbanized areas.
Conservation of natural resources is a high priority and integral part of the County’s long-term
land use goals. Natural resource conservation efforts have primarily succeeded through the
comprehensive planning process and subsequent changes in zoning/subdivision regulations. County
planning staff works to keep long range and resource planning issues in front of the various volunteer
commissions while continuing to review development and
subdivision plans. A variety of public agencies aid property
owners who wish to voluntarily manage, conserve and
restore natural resources on their property. Now, State and
Federal programs are the primary means of large scale
natural resource protection in Washington County.
Cultural and economic values of a wide range of forest
land, streams and rivers are well preserved by the National
Park Service and the Maryland Forest and Park Services. As
described in the Parks section of the Plan, nearly 40,000 acres
of Federal and State-owned park and forest land are
protected in the County. These areas offer a valuable
resource for outdoor recreation and nature and wildlife
appreciation and contribute to the variety of tourism
opportunities available in the County.
The public benefits from these efforts are numerous. There are opportunities for hunting, fishing,
hiking, biking, swimming, picnicking, nature walks, bird watching, etc. Government support of outdoor
Photo 7: Wilson Bridge spanning the Conococheague Creek in
Washington County, MD
Photo 8: View of High Rock located along
South Mountain in Washington County, MD
45
recreation amenities includes:
♦ Over 100 miles of bicycle routes along County,
city, and State highways. These routes lead the
rider past scenic vistas, and historic sites.
♦ The Appalachian Trail offers the day hiker,
section hiker, and through hiker over 40 miles of
crest walking, punctuated by vistas of the Great
Valley and road crossings which simplify access
and resupply.
♦ The Maryland Heights Trail and others at
Antietam Battlefield and Fort Frederick lead the
hiker through history and provide opportunities
to view the natural habitat of the myriad of
species that call Maryland home.
♦ The C&O Canal offers users an opportunity to
view the history of transportation in the County.
Several lock houses and locks have been restored to show how the canal functioned.
♦ A few official boat launches and frequent access points give the canoeist and kayaker the flexibility
of having hours and miles of travel along the creeks, or just a quick trip. (While these water trails
are not ‘official’, there are traditional put in’s and take outs along the Antietam Creek that have
been used for many years.)
♦ The Washington County Parks amenities are detailed elsewhere in this plan; pavilions and picnic
areas are in almost every park. Four County parks are located on waterways (Camp Harding,
Wilson Bridge, Devil’s Backbone and Kemps Mill); one is dedicated to a wetland (Mt. Briar
Wetland); and all are sited to provide neighboring areas with a public space to rest and recreate.
♦ One refurbished public-school site storm water management system was built as a bio retention
area performing a valuable function in cleaning run-off, while providing students with close access
to a wetland for study and observation.
♦ Some County properties have room for expansion of amenities, and the recently added disc golf
course and riding trails are good examples of the willingness of park administration to move
quickly on requests for added amenities, provided funding is available.
Goals for Natural Resource Land Conservation
Identify, protect, and restore lands and waterways in Maryland that support aquatic and
terrestrial natural resources and ecological functions, through combined use of the following
techniques:
o Public land acquisition and stewardship
o Private land conservation easements and stewardship practices through purchased or
donated easement programs;
o Local land use management plans and procedures that conserve natural resources and
environmentally sensitive areas and minimize impacts to resource lands when
development occurs;
o Support incentives for resource-based economies that increase the retention of forests,
Photo 9: C & O Canal Towpath in Washington County,
MD
46
wetlands or agricultural lands;
o Avoidance of impacts on natural resources by publicly funded infrastructure development
projects; and
o Appropriate mitigation response, commensurate with the value of the affected resource.
♦ Focus conservation and restoration activities on priority areas, according to a strategic framework
such as the Targeted Ecological Areas (TEAs) in GreenPrint (which is not to be confused with the
former easement program also called GreenPrint).
♦ Conserve and restore species of concern and important habitat types that may fall outside of
designated green infrastructure (examples include: rock outcrops, karst systems, caves, shale
barren communities, grasslands, shoreline beach and dune systems, mud flats, non-forested
islands, etc.)
♦ Develop a more comprehensive inventory of natural resource lands and environmentally sensitive
areas to assist state and local implementation programs.
♦ Establish measurable objectives for natural resource conservation and an integrated state/local
strategy to achieve them through state and local implementation programs.
♦ Assess the combined ability of state and local programs to achieve the following:
o Expand and connect forests, farmland and other natural lands as a network of contiguous
green infrastructure;
o Protect critical terrestrial and aquatic habitats, biological communities and populations;
o Manage watersheds in ways that protect, conserve, and restore stream corridors, riparian
forest buffers, wetlands, floodplains and aquifer recharge areas and their associated
hydrologic and water quality functions;
o Adopt coordinated land and watershed management strategies that recognize the critical
links between growth management and aquatic biodiversity and fisheries production; and
o Support a productive forestland base and forest resource industry, emphasizing the
economic viability of privately owned forestland.
Environmental and natural conservation is supported throughout The County Comprehensive Plan.
Goal #3, Chapter 2 reads: “Encourage the stewardship of the environment and the County’s heritage.”
The Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan has these objectives in relation to this goal:
♦ Balance future growth with the need to preserve the historical, cultural, and scenic beauty of the
County for future generations.
♦ Promote the compatibility of the built and natural environments by ensuring that the scale and
character of development are harmonious with existing conditions.
♦ Target development away from lands with quality agricultural soils, thereby maximizing
agricultural potential and limiting conflicts with existing agricultural operations.
♦ Limit the amount of development in sensitive areas.
♦ Safeguard the unique environmental character of designated special planning areas.
♦ Promote Rural Legacy initiatives in all the rural areas of the County.
♦ Maintain, and where feasible, expand forest conservation efforts.
♦ Protect surface and ground water quality through storm water management, on lot sewage
disposal, and wellhead protection regulations.
♦ Encourage recycling and resource conservation.
47
Photo 10: View of Hagerstown Valley from High Rock in Washington County, MD
These goals represent the concern planners have for the future of natural resource lands in
Washington County. They speak of the desire for future generations to have the enjoyment of the natural
and historic settings that the current generation enjoys. Details of new lands in the preservation programs
are provided in the Agricultural Land Preservation and Easement Acquisition Program section of this
report. The enforcement of current county land use and zoning ordinances and their related codes has
continued to support these goals in those instances where development has been proposed in natural
resource areas.
Inventory of Protected Natural Resource Lands and Mapping
Washington County has a mixture of areas that are protected for natural resource conservation.
Much of the land under protection is governmentally (State and Federal) owned land. There are currently
four National Parks located within Washington
County; Antietam National Battlefield, Chesapeake &
Ohio Canal National Historic Park, Harper’s Ferry
(Maryland Heights) National Historic Park, and the
Appalachian National Scenic Trail. While each of
these parks serves to protect more historical and
cultural resources the mere protection of the land
serves to also protect the environment around them.
The same can be said for the Maryland State
Park system. While most of the State Parks have
been established to provide recreational
opportunities for the citizens, they also serve to
protect the environment as well. While most of the state parks have been established to provide
recreational opportunities, there are several that have been established to provide environmental and
habitat protection. These include Natural Resources Management Areas (NRMA), Fishery Management
Areas (FMA), and Wildlife Management Areas (WMA).
Sprinkled around the County are other various types of protections such as scenic, historic, or
environmental easements. These easements vary widely in their purpose and can be established through
both governmental and private, non-profit organizations. Examples of these types of easements include:
Photo 11: Dunkard Church at Antietam Battlefield in
Washington County, MD
48
♦ Federal scenic easements. These easements are purchased from private property owners mostly
around the C&O Canal corridor to protect the scenic viewsheds of the area along the canal. They
vary in the types of restrictions that are placed on the property from tree cutting to where
structures may or may not be located.
♦ Maryland Environmental Trust easements. The Maryland Environmental Trust is a quasi-public
organization that is both a unit of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources and is governed
by a private Board of Trustees. Their stated purpose is “…to conserve, improve, stimulate, and
perpetuate the aesthetic, natural, health and welfare, scenic, and cultural qualities of the
environment…”
♦ Private and Non-profit organization easements. There are a few other private and/non-profit
organizations working in Washington County to preserve various aspects of our natural and
cultural resources. Some examples include Save Historic Antietam Foundation, Mid-Maryland
Land Trust, the Nature Conservancy, and the Conservation Fund.
♦ Forest Conservation Act Easements. Also included within the category of easements are those
related to the State Forest Conservation Act (FCA). The FCA was implemented by the Maryland
General Assembly to reduce the impacts of development on statewide forest resources. When
new development occurs, there is a standard review of the forest resources and sometimes a
mitigation component to off-set the impacts on forest resources.
A spreadsheet delineating the County natural resource inventory is in Appendix B.
Implementation of Resource Management
It is a goal of the County to support the conservation of our natural resources, preservation of our
natural beauty and rural character, and the enhancement of our recreational opportunities. The
implementation of this goal is through continuous long-term land use policies to guide growth and
development into defined growth areas to help preserve the rural character of our County. Easements
and fee simple purchases of natural resource land have been the main strategies of the State Green Print
and State funded Rural Legacy programs. Newer programs such as the Conservation Resource
Enhancement Program (CREP) have added to our opportunities for land preservation and natural resource
conservation. There are also numerous regulatory ordinances, functional plans, and resource based
programs that are used to help achieve our short and long-term goals. A brief description of these
documents and programs are outlined below.
Implementation of Previous Plan
Goals outlined in the previous plan revolved largely around the general goals established with the
Comprehensive Plan. One of the primary goals of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan is to “Encourage the
stewardship of the environment and the County’s heritage.” As part of this goal there are nine objectives
listed to assist in achieving this overall goal. They range from limiting and balancing new growth with
environmental concerns to encouraging recycling and resource conservation.
Recommendations from the previous plan provided general information regarding routine
watershed management program being implemented by the County. Programs such as the Forest
Conservation Act and grants for a watershed assessment were discussed as tools that we should continue
to use as part of our watershed management plans. The County has surpassed these minimal goals
established for watershed assessments by implementing a full watershed management program housed
49
within the Division of Environmental Management. This program is detailed in later sections of this
chapter.
The Forest Conservation Act continues to be an important tool in the goals to promote resource
conservation, water quality, and stormwater management. Some progress has been made by the County
in implementing the Act but the recent economic recession has been the most influential effect on forest
conservation efforts. Decreased demand for new development has reduced the pressure on forest
resources.
Comprehensive Plan
The primary purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to manage growth and development in a
manner that is efficient and responsible and provides for the harmonious development of an area while
also protecting the various resources needed in a community. Washington County has used the principal
of building growth into designated areas, known as Growth Areas, where infrastructure and resources are
already in place to handle new development while at the same time promoting the preservation of our
Rural Areas through land preservation and natural resource conservation efforts.
Land Use Plan
Designated Growth Areas are located in the vicinity of existing large-scale development that have
existing infrastructure available to support new growth. The land use designations within established
growth area promote higher residential densities and locations for numerous commercial and industrial
areas. Currently Washington County has one large Urban Growth Area that surrounds the City of
Hagerstown and the Towns of Williamsport and Funkstown. There are also smaller growth areas
established around the Towns of Smithsburg, Hancock, Clear Spring, and Boonsboro.
To further support and encourage development to occur within designated growth areas, the
Comprehensive Plan also specifically calls out the Rural Areas of the County as resource areas that should
be preserved and protected. This is accomplished with policies and recommendations to limit new
residential development in these areas and promote open space through various land preservation
programs. Rural land use policy areas delineated in the Comprehensive Plan include:
Agriculture
The Agriculture land use policy area is primarily associated with sections of the County in the
Great Hagerstown Valley. It extends around most of the UGA and south to Boonsboro. Another area of
the County with the Agriculture land use policy area is from the Conococheague Creek west to the foot of
Fairview Mountain. The Agriculture policy area has been purposely drawn to enclose large blocks of the
best soils for intensive agricultural production. Most of the operating farms as well as the largest block of
farmland preserved through various land preservation programs are in this area.
Environmental Conservation
The Environmental Conservation policy area is associated with locations in the County where
environ-mental sensitivity issues are prominent enough to warrant constraints on development. It
includes steep slopes and forested areas on mountainsides as well as the steep slopes, flood-plains, and
forested areas along the Potomac River, lower Antietam Creek, Conococheague Creek and Beaver Creek.
50
Preservation
The Preservation policy area was designated to become the foundation for land preservation
efforts in the Rural Area. This policy area includes the County designated Rural Legacy Area, Federal lands,
State parks, State wildlife management areas, and County parks. This area is designated to have the most
restrictive limitation on development in the Rural Area to support preservation efforts in these areas.
The County Land Use Plan map is provided in Appendix A.
Special Planning Areas
In addition to recommending land use controls for specific rural areas in the County, the
Comprehensive Plan also designates Special Planning and Program Areas. These are applied as overlays
to the land use policy areas to indicate the existence of a feature which warrants more review and
protection. As shown on the Special Program Areas Map some of the designated areas include; the
Edgemont and Smithsburg Reservoir Watersheds, Appalachian Trail Corridor, Upper Beaver Creek Basin
and Beaver Creek Trout Hatchery, Antietam Battlefield Overlay, Civil War Heritage Areas, National Scenic
Road designations, American Heritage River designations, rail trails, greenways, and blueways. This is first
step toward developing a Green Infrastructure Assessment.
The County Special Planning and Program Areas map is in Appendix A.
Sensitive Areas Element
The issue of sensitive areas and their importance is not
a new topic to the County. Since the first Comprehensive Plan
adopted in 1971 the County has targeted these areas for their
importance in the environmental health and natural benefits.
Sensitive areas were formalized and defined as part of the
Planning Act of 1992. Included in the definition of a sensitive
area are streams and their buffers, 100-year floodplains,
habitats of threatened and endangered species, and steep
slopes.
Also as part of the Planning Act, local jurisdictions were permitted and encouraged to identify
additional sensitive areas that may be unique and locally important. The Comprehensive Plan adopted in
1981 had already brought attention to several unique areas in the County that were worthy of additional
consideration to limit the impacts of development in these areas. These areas included the
Smithsburg/Edgemont Watershed, the Beaver Creek Watershed, and the Appalachian Trail corridor. In
1996, the County formally adopted amendments to the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinance giving special
consideration to the effects of development on these unique areas.
Watershed Management Programs
Washington County lies entirely within the Potomac River Watershed. The Potomac River is one
of three major watershed basins that drain into the Chesapeake Bay.
One of the primary methods
used to manage growth in
Washington County is through
the establishment of defined
growth areas as part of the
overall Land Use Plan.
51
One of the primary goals of any government is to provide a safe water supply. Since 1983 the
Chesapeake Bay Partnership (CBP) has used written agreements to guide the restoration of the Bay and
its watershed. These agreements have been revised from time to time to revise or include goals that are
in line with the best available technology and
advancements in science. The latest reaffirmation of
the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement in 2014
has provided the impetus for the State, in partnership
with the Counties and incorporated municipalities, to
develop long term plans for watershed protection and
water quality improvements.
The County’s first major foray into watershed
management began in 1992. A targeted watershed
management project was initiated by the Washington
County Soil Conservation District for the Little
Antietam Creek and Marsh Run sub-watersheds. The area was expanded in 1996 to include the Beaver
Creek watershed. A Soil Conservation Planner was hired to complete a watershed assessment and to
begin educational efforts in the targeted sub-watersheds. This was funded by an Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Nonpoint source grant from Section 319 of the Clean Water Act and was obtained
through the MD Department of Agriculture. A conservation technician was hired to help install best
management practices (BMP) identified by the planner in Soil and Water Conservation Programs. This
program has continued in the Beaver Creek and Marsh Run sub-watersheds.
Water Quality and Stormwater Management
Since the adoption of the 2012 LPPRP the State and local jurisdictions have worked together to
develop the next phase of a Statewide Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP). The Phase 2 WIP continues
efforts to establish goals and measure progress toward water quality standards and their impacts on the
Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
In response to the undertaking of the County to assist the State with data collection and analysis
for the WIP development the County has redefined its stormwater management program. A watershed
management planner was hired to help oversee the program. Since the adoption of the last LPPRP the
County has greatly expanded both its education efforts as well as its implementation efforts. To improve
education, Staff from the Division of Environmental Management have worked with the local schools and
the County Board of Education to make presentations to students about the challenges and opportunities
to improve water quality. Staff also attends several special events in the County each year to educate the
public on methods to help protect water resources such as usage of rain barrels, usage of grey water to
maintain outdoor areas, and household water conservation techniques.
Land Use management is another key focus area related to the County’s watershed management
efforts. In 2010, the County adopted the Stormwater Management, Grading, Soil Erosion and Sediment
Control Ordinance. This new ordinance adopted stormwater management guidelines in accordance with
State law to require the implementation of best management practices (BMPs) of environmental site
design (ESD) to the maximum extent practicable (MEP). The implementation of this Ordinance has helped
reduce the negative impacts of land development on water resources and maintain the chemical, physical,
and biological integrity of streams in the County.
Photo 12: The Potomac River along Cushwa Basin in
Washington County, MD
52
Map 11: Watersheds in Washington County, MD
Forest Resource Management Programs
In 1991 the State passed the Maryland Forest Conservation Act. The intent of the
law is to minimize the loss of forest land from development and ensure that priority areas for forest
locations are identified and protected prior to development. After passage of the law the County drafted
and adopted the Forest Conservation Ordinance to provide local regulatory support to the Act.
Implementation of the Forest Conservation Ordinance serves a dual purpose in that it protects valuable
forest resources for future generations and it encourages the implementation of forest resources in
sensitive areas where it is also valuable to the overall ecosystem.
According to the 15-year Forest Conservation Act Review the State overall has been successful in
limiting clearing of forest resources. Nearly all Counties subject to the law, including Washington County,
have been able to retain 65-70% of forest resources made susceptible to clearing by development.
Washington County specifically has retained nearly 2,000 acres of forest since the inception of the Act in
1993.3
In addition, the cooperative Forest Conservation Act Program managed by the Washington
3 Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Forest Service, “15-year FCA review”.
53
County Soil Conservation District (SCD) provides stream buffering and protection by means of easement
purchase of existing forest or planting of new forest. Efforts are focused on the most sensitive areas along
streams, steep slopes, and those areas providing wildlife habitat or other environmental benefits. The
SCD locates willing landowners, then manages the various stages of forest conservation or tree planting
and monitors the sites for 20 years after the establishment of the forest conservation areas. It is funded
using money placed in the Forest Conservation Fund by developers. (See Map 12)
Map 12: Steep Slopes and Forested Areas in Washington County, MD
Streams and Floodplains
There are several regulatory Ordinances in the County that work in concert to limit the damaging
effects of development on local waterways such as streams and floodplains. These ordinances include
the Subdivision Ordinance and the Floodplain Management Ordinance. (See Map 13)
54
Map 13: Streams and Floodplains in Washington County, MD
Subdivision Ordinance/Zoning Ordinance
The County Subdivision Ordinance outlines basic requirements for the location and orderly
arrangement of new subdivisions as they relate to various aspects of development including
environmental impacts. The Zoning Ordinance also provides a regulatory framework for new
development. Both the Subdivision Ordinance and the Zoning Ordinance specifically define streams and
their associated buffers and floodplains as areas sensitive to the impacts of development and therefore
require additional mitigation efforts to reduce said impacts.
To help reduce environmental impacts, development that occurs on land that contains a perennial
or intermittent stream is required to provide a dimensional buffer proportionate to the amount of slope
immediately adjacent to the waterway. Such buffers are applied to both sides of the waterway and
restrict development and land disturbance within these areas. Development is also restricted within areas
located in the boundaries of the 100-year floodplain as determined by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). Installation of new septic systems and their associated drainage areas are
prohibited in both stream buffers and floodplains.
Floodplain Management Ordinance
The purpose of the Floodplain Management Ordinance is to protect human life and to minimize
55
impacts on infrastructure, property, and the natural environment. By delineating flood prone areas,
development can be directed away from those areas and allow for the inevitable evolution of the
waterway. New construction and/or disturbance of the land within designated floodplain areas is severely
limited and in some cases prohibited. Most construction is required to be elevated to a point at or above
the base flood level.
Habitat and Wildlife
Conservation efforts for habitat protection are crucial to limiting harmful impacts on the wildlife
and overall ecosystem. This is especially true for plants and animals currently listed on the Federally
Threatened and Endangered Species List. There are currently three species in Washington County (two
plants and one animal) listed as endangered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. There is also one animal
species listed as threatened on the Federal listing. The State of Maryland Wildlife and Heritage Service
also maintains a list of statewide threatened and endangered species habitats. Information regarding
State designated threatened and endangered species can be found on their website at
www.dnr.maryland.gov/wildlife.
Map 14: Endangered Species Map for Washington County, MD
At this time, it is known that habitats of federally listed species in Washington County appear to
be limited to a few rural areas in the western portion of the county where large scale or large amounts of
56
development are not encouraged. Furthermore, large portions of the areas where these habitats exist
are currently under Federal or State government ownership. State designated threatened and
endangered species are sporadically scattered across the County and are also contained primarily within
areas that are owned by the State or Federal government. (See Map 14)
The State also has programs in place to help identify ecologically significant areas including
Maryland’s Biodiversity Conservation Network (BioNet) and Maryland Greenprint.
• BioNet – prioritizes areas of statewide importance for the conservation of species and
natural habitat into a 5-tiered system, with Tier 1 being the most important for
conservation. In Washington County, approximately 22,673 acres are classified as Tier 1 or
II while about 80,795 acres are Tier III, IV or V.
Map 15: MD Bionet for Washington County, MD
• Maryland Greenprint – identifies areas of high ecological value, known as Targeted
Ecological Areas (TEAs) and promotes protection of these areas. According to MD DNR,
“These areas represent the most ecologically valuable areas in the State: they are the ‘best
of the best’”. The primary source of funding to protect these areas is through the Statewide
Program Open Space program. Most of the areas designated as TEAs by the State are also
57
located in the Environmental Conservation and Preservation land use policy areas of the
County Comprehensive Plan. The land use policy areas mimic the State policies that these
areas have ecological value and development should be limited in its volume and type.
Map 16: Maryland Greenprint Areas in Washington County, MD
58
AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION AND EASEMENT ACQUISITION
PROGRAMS
Executive Summary
In the 1970’s, housing booms marked the arrival of a new era of fast paced urbanization projects
that spread into historically rural areas. This trend of urban sprawl into historically rural areas caused a
marked decline in agricultural resources and spurred efforts within the County to preserve quality
agricultural land. At the same time, many State and Federal agencies were also developing different
conservation programs directed at preserving farmland on a larger scale. In April 1978 the County
established a new land preservation program. It consisted at the time of one easement program started
by the State known as the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Program (MALPP). Over the 40-year
period, the County’s land preservation program has been very active; it has grown to the administration
of seven different programs that have permanently preserved over 28,000 acres of land. To leverage the
greatest benefit from the MALPP program, Washington County participates in, and is certified by, the
Program for the Certification of County Agricultural Land Preservation Programs. The most recent re-
certification was approved in September 2017.
Agricultural Industry in Washington County
Since its establishment in 1776, Washington County has been a primarily rural agrarian society.
Agriculture is still currently the primary land use in the County. According to the US Department of
Agriculture: Census of Agriculture, in 2012 there were approximately 129,600 acres of land in the County
included in farms. The USDA Census of Agriculture defines a farm as “any place from which $1,000 or
more of agricultural products were produced and sold, or normally would have been sold, in the census
year.” As shown in the table below, the amount of land associated with farms decreased sharply between
1978 and 1992. However, between 1997 and 2012 the figures have stabilized and show a small gain in
2012 (see Table 8). Also shown in this table are the number of farms and the average size of farms over
the same period of 1978 to 2012. While the number of farms has varied widely over the period, the
average size of farms in the County has stayed mostly steady between 150 and 160 acres.
1978 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 2012
Land in Farms 151,065 145,983 137,529 123,932 126,292 125,159 114,065 129,600
# of Farms 878 962 906 809 768 775 844 860
Average Size of Farms 172 152 152 153 164 161 135 151
Area, Number and Size of Farms in Washington County, MD 1978-2012
Source: USDA Census of Agriculture Table 8: Statistical Changes in Agricultural Land in Washington County, MD (1978-2012)
After adoption of the 1980 Comprehensive Plan the County began to track the amount of land
preserved vs. the amount of land converted to uses other than agriculture or woodlands. This became a
new metric by which the County could more accurately determine if land preservation programs and other
land management programs are effectively reducing sprawl and preserving open space. As shown in the
chart below, after an initial period of high conversion vs. preservation, the County has continued to
outpace conversion with land preservation efforts for the last 30 years.
59
Figure 6: Agricultural Lands Converted vs. Preserved in Washington County, MD (1981-2015)
Goals for Agricultural Land Preservation
State Goals for Agricultural Land Preservation
♦ Permanently preserve agricultural land capable of supporting a reasonable diversity of
agricultural production;
♦ Protect natural, forestry and historic resources and the rural character of the landscape
associated with Maryland’s farmland;
♦ To the greatest degree possible, concentrate preserved land in large, relatively contiguous blocks
to effectively support long-term protection of resources and resource-based industries;
♦ Limit the intrusion of development and its impacts on rural resources and resource-based
industries;
♦ Ensure good return on public investment by concentrating state agricultural land preservation
funds in areas where the investment is reasonably well supported by both local investment and
land use management programs;
♦ Work with local governments to achieve the following:
o Establish preservation areas, goals and strategies through local comprehensive planning
processes that address and complement state goals;
o In each area designated for preservation, develop a shared understanding of goals and
the strategy to achieve them among rural landowners, the public-at-large and state and
local government officials;
o Protect the equity interests of rural landowners in preservation areas by ensuring
sufficient public commitment and investment in preservation through easement
acquisition and incentive programs;
o Use local land use management authority effectively to protect public investment in
1981-
1985
1986-
1990
1991-
1995
1996-
2000
2001-
2005
2006-
2010
2011-
2015
Converted 1,589 1,120 1,010 870 1166 651 155
Preserved 1,106 1,494 1,334 2,427 5757 6164 2427
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
Agricultural Lands Converted vs. Preserved
1981-2015
Washington County, Maryland
Converted
Preserved
60
preservation by managing development in rural preservation areas;
o Establish effective measures to support profitable agriculture, including assistance in
production, marketing and the practice of stewardship, so that farming remains a
desirable way of life for both the farmer and public-at-large.
The agriculture industry plays a major role in the economy, sustainability, and overall character
of Washington County. Recognizing this fact, the County has developed several goals and objectives in
the Comprehensive Plan to help support growth of the industry. Primarily, Comprehensive Plan Goal #2
states the County’s priority in supporting the agriculture industry by “Promot[ing] a balanced and
diversified economy, including agriculture.” The main agricultural objective to this end is to “Maintain at
least 50,000 acres in the county in agricultural production by expanding current agricultural land
preservation initiatives with an emphasis on preserving farming as a way of life and promoting the
agricultural support industry.” This acreage goal was developed in the early 1990s in coordination with
the Agricultural Extension Office and the University of Maryland based on an evaluation of critical land
mass needed to support the agriculture industry.
Listed below are excerpts of goals and objectives from the Plan to demonstrate the County’s
desire to promote the agricultural industry.
♦ Continue efforts to develop permanent funding sources that can sustain an agricultural
easement and development rights acquisition program.
♦ Continue the Agricultural District Program as an interim program to support agricultural
preservation until agricultural easements can be acquired.
♦ Develop setbacks, screening and buffering for residential development proposed adjacent to
agricultural preservation districts or easements that would require mitigation to protect the
integrity of the agricultural property and not the proposed residential development.
♦ Work with the Washington County Soil Conservation District and the Agricultural Extension
Agency to enhance current regulatory requirements that address animal waste collection and
disposal processes to insure balance with environmental concerns.
Implementation Programs and Services
Implementation of Previous Plan
Since the adoption of the 2012 LPPRP the County has made progress toward meeting the goals
and recommendations of that Plan. In the 2012 LPPRP several general implementation programs were
discussed involving assessment of existing programs and recommended methods for improvement.
Those same programs are continued into this document.
The primary method used in Washington County to implement the goals for agricultural land
preservation is through easement acquisition. Through a combination of several land preservation
programs the County spent approximately $18,200,000 to preserve about 4400 acres of land in the years
2006-2010 according to the 2012 LPPRP. In this update the County reports that almost $9.8 million was
spent to preserve about 2600 acres. The reason for the large difference between the two plans relate to
Environmental Resources Management
61
the recent economic recession. Easement funds were higher in 2006-2010 because of heightened
development. The following recession drastically reduced the funding available for easement purchase.
The County has continued to look for alternative funding mechanisms such as Transferable Development
Rights (TDRs) and an Installment Purchase Program (IPP).
The IPP program has proven to be quite successful in obtaining new easements. The program
recently finished paying the first 10-year cycle of easements and found the program to be so useful that
the program was extended for a new cycle of easement purchase. While the IPP program has been
successful the concept of a TDR program has been all but abandoned. Rising housing costs, increased
infrastructure needs (i.e. residential sprinkler systems, advanced technology septic systems, and
increased stormwater management needs), and low median household incomes have nearly priced
average County citizens out of the market. It has been determined that adding additional costs like those
associated with TDR programs would be too much of a burden if the County wishes to maintain a high
level of home ownership.
Assistance programs have been put in place over the years to help support the agriculture industry.
Past accomplishments have been the hiring of an Agricultural Marketing Specialist, continued support of
the Agriculture Education Center, and adoption of a Right to Farm Ordinance. These programs have been
successful in educating the public on agricultural techniques and sourcing of food resources. The
marketing specialist continues to provide opportunities for local farmers to sell products locally at farm
markets and special events. This position also continues to give a face to local agricultural operations and
farms by using technology (farm market app) and event planning (ag expo, farmers markets) to bring the
buyer and seller together.
The right to farm ordinance is another tool used by the County to help educate the public on the
operations of the agricultural industry. The purpose of the Ordinance is to candidly make new property
owners aware of the potential conflicts between an agricultural operation and residential uses. It is also
intended to provide some protection to existing farm operations from the potential complaints of
encroaching development regarding issues such as noise, odor, and insect control. While a useful tool if
needed, there has been only one case brought before the Right to Farm Board since its inception.
The primary efforts to protect and preserve agricultural land are still through the purchase of
development rights with various land preservation programs administered by the County. Easement
purchase programs such as the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Program (MALPP), Rural Legacy,
Farm and Ranchland Protection Program (FRPP) (recently reorganized into the Agricultural Conservation
Easement Program), Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), and Installment Payment
Purchases (IPP) are being used to further our goal of permanently preserving 50,000 acres of land. The
County has also continued to work with several land trust organizations such as the Maryland
Environmental Trust and the Civil War Trust to gain additional land preservation easements. As shown in
the chart below, the County continues to have success in easement purchases.
Land Preservation and Easement Acquisition
62
Most easement acquisitions come from the MALPP and Rural Legacy Programs. The MALPP is a joint
easement program between the State and the County to acquire highly productive agricultural land by
purchasing easements that extinguish development rights on a property. The Rural Legacy Program works
much the same way except this program broadens the scope of easement purchase to environmentally
sensitive properties. A full listing of easements settled to date is in Appendix B. Other tools used by the
County to assist in the protection of farmland are preferential tax treatment for agriculturally assessed
land, agricultural zoning and the Agricultural District Program.
Program Acres Farms Amount
MALPF
Rural Legacy 233.12 3 $1,131,487
MET 10.68 1 $0
CREP 102.49 3 $382,683
Subtotal 346.29 7 $1,514,171
MALPF 115.27 1 $480,702
Rural Legacy 50.55 1 $258,160
MET
CREP 97.87 4 $369,635
IPP
Subtotal 263.69 6 $1,108,496
MALPF
Rural Legacy 329.05 4 $1,299,618
MET 1.09 1 $0
CREP 115.58 3 $437,927
Subtotal 445.72 8 $1,737,545
MALPF 152.29 1 $906,713
Rural Legacy 317.30 2 $1,024,494
MET
CREP 0.00 0 $0
Subtotal 469.59 3 $1,931,207
MALPF 41.14 1 $0
Rural Legacy 70.90 2 $215,404
MET
CREP 99.83 3 $323,999
Subtotal 211.87 6 $539,403
MALPF 185.85 1 $727,500
Rural Legacy 510.69 6 $1,620,781
MET
CREP 170.24 2 $595,952
Subtotal 866.77 9 $2,944,233
2,603.94 39 $9,775,055
2016
Grand Total
Land Preservation Expenditures FY 2011-2016
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Table 9: Land Preservation Expenditures in Washington County, MD
()
63
The Agricultural District Program encourages landowners to voluntarily enter an Agricultural Land
Preservation District in which it is agreed that the land will not be developed for a period of at least five
years. In return for that restriction, the landowner receives protection from nuisance complaints and
becomes eligible to sell a Development Rights Easement. The owner may exercise the option of selling
an easement to the Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation provided that the offer to sell is
recommended by the County's Advisory Board and the County Commissioners. Locally, the Agricultural
Advisory Board reviews and ranks easement applications, assigning point value to items such as farm size,
soil quality and development pressure. If purchased by the State, the easement will remain in effect in
perpetuity.
As is usually the case with easement purchase programs, funding continues to be the major
limiting factor in attaining our goals. The land preservation program has been continuing to try to adapt
to the lack of funding through alternative efforts such as land donation, long term purchase programs (i.e.
IPPs where installment payments are made over a 10-year period), and easement donations that can be
offset through tax credits and incentives.
Another limiting factor in using easement purchase programs has become the overwhelming
amount of documentation and easement preparation. Property owners are becoming intimidated by the
amount of restriction and cost of legal representation to the point that easements are beginning to be
viewed as too restrictive or complicated to be worth the property owner’s time to invest.
The County continues to use an Agricultural Marketing Specialist to assist in promoting the
agricultural industry in Washington County. The Agricultural Marketing Office is responsible for
developing, marketing, and managing economic development strategies and implementing marketing
programs to attract, retain, preserve and grow agricultural enterprises
and related industries in Washington County. Since its inception, the
Agricultural Marketing Office has enhanced the visibility of the
agriculture industry in the County by promoting farmers markets, ag
expos, farm tours, agri-tourism events, and educational and safety
courses.
Most recently the office has released a new mobile app called
Agri-tourism in Washington County, MD. The app provides locations of
Farmer’s markets, discusses the benefits of agriculture, provides news
updates on upcoming agri-tourism events, and introduces the public to
local farmers. It is an effort to close the gap between the producer and
the purchaser supporting local and statewide efforts to endorse “Locally
Grown” initiatives.
Another important project the County Commissioners have
supported is the Agriculture Education Center. Owned and operated by
the County, with financial assistance from the State, the Education Center holds events year-round to
promote and educate people about the agricultural industry. It includes the Rural Heritage Museum
featuring exhibits depicting early rural life in Washington County prior to 1940. A second museum
building houses larger pieces of farm equipment and farm implements. It shows the progression from
Assistance Programs
64
human powered and horse drawn equipment to the motorized era.
The Rural Heritage Farmstead began in 1999 when a windmill was relocated to the upper portion
of the property. Since then, there have been many additions including two log homes, an outdoor drying
shed, a brick wood fired bread oven, and a pavilion
to house a sawmill.
The gardens include a German Four-
Square garden filled with heirloom plants
including vegetables, herbs, and flowers. There is
also a large garden for planting potatoes for the
museum’s annual Spud Fest, which was recently
expanded to include three sisters, rye, wheat, and
a berry patch.
Located on the lower grounds, adjacent to the
museum buildings is the Rural Heritage Village
which continues to grow. Currently, there is a log church, a log home, and a Doctor’s Office. Future plans
for the village include a cobbler and broom makers shop, a carpenter’s shop, and a blacksmith shop. This
exhibit will serve to educate the visitor about life in Washington County in the decades surrounding the
Civil War.
Land Use Management Washington County land use policies and decisions are guided by the 2002 Comprehensive Plan.
Since its adoption, various economic, environmental, and social changes have occurred that continue to
dynamically shape our local land use policies. However, our primary goal of directing development into
designated growth areas and preservation of our open spaces has continued to be the primary objective
in land management policies.
To that end, the County has evaluated and amended several regulatory documents to implement
this primary objective. In 2005, the Board of County Commissioners adopted new rural area zoning
districts that reduced the amount of potential development allowed outside of designated Growth Area
boundaries. Four new zoning districts were designated and applied in the rural areas of the County to
decrease development pressure and increase open space protections. The four zoning districts include:
In 2010, the County
amended its Comprehensive Plan to include Priority Preservation Areas. Three large and three small areas
totaling 74,854 acres were delineated in accordance with the Agricultural Stewardship Act of 2006 as
areas where land preservation efforts should be directed. Location within these areas was added as a
category for evaluation as part of the MALPP easement purchase priority ranking system. Inclusion in this
evaluation has helped direct land preservation funding more efficiently into areas of existing land
Agriculture Rural
District
Permits residential
density at a rate of one
(1) dwelling unit per
five (5) acres of land
Preservation District
Permits residential
density at a rate of one
(1) dwelling unit per
thirty (30) acres of land
owned.
Environmental
Conservation District
Permits residential
density at a rate of one
(1) dwelling unit per
twenty (20) acres of
Rural Village District
Provides small areas
with existing dense
residential
development to allow
for infill.
65
preservation. Currently, approximately 26,408 acres within the PPAs are under permanent preservation
easements.
Map 17: Priority Preservation Areas in Washington County, MD
In 2012 and 2016, the County completed Comprehensive rezoning of the Urban Growth Area and
Town Growth Areas respectively. These amendments included increased residential development
densities in areas where infrastructure is currently available.
The strategy outlined in the 2012 LPPRP to, “Work with the Washington County Soil Conservation
District and the Agricultural Extension Agency to enhance current regulatory requirements that address
animal waste collection and disposal processes to ensure balance with environmental concerns” has
resulted in a coordination of effort between Washington County Staff and Soil Conservation personnel in
implementing best management practices in land preservation and agricultural practices in general,
including:
♦ CREP and Rural Legacy projects employ the use of stream buffers and another
agricultural BMP’s;
♦ Many MALPF and Ag District holders have been working with SCD to implement State
and federal required BMP’s on private lands;
66
♦ The Ag community has been generally accepting of these processes and has put forth
exceptional efforts to curb any adverse effects on the environment.
67
APPENDICIES
APPENDIX A
Full Sized Maps
Appendix B
Parkland Inventory
Natural Resources Inventory
Agricultural Land Preservation Inventory
Site Name
Easement Size
(Acres)
Protection Type
(ownership or
easement type)
Heimer, Jean and Lane 68.71 CREP
Schooley, David and Patricia 118.52 CREP
Czarra, Edgar F., Jr 296.57 CREPWD Farms LLC 107.92 CREP
Engstrom, George and Carol 39.04 CREP
Stone, Elmer A., Jr. 150.04 CREP
Clagett, Virginia 194.04 CREP
Weaver, Carl P.169.05 CREP
Stoner Family Farms LLC 81.97 CREP
Howell, William J.127.45 CREP
David, Edwin E.130.97 CREPCogan, Jerilyn J.133.6 CREP
David, Edwin E.59.88 CREP
Salgado, Marie E.158.44 CREP
Bowers, Anna F. Gale 154.28 CREP
Payne/Holder 111.68 Rural Legacy
Ritondo 138.87 Rural Legacy
Czarra 148.13 Rural Legacy
Traska 53.82 Rural LegacyMorgan34.41 Rural LegacyYoung45.67 Rural Legacy
Heron 132.34 Rural Legacy
Ingram 45.60 Rural Legacy
Pearson 98.37 Rural Legacy
Huffer 133.83 Rural Legacy
Ecker 246.98 Rural Legacy
Poffenberger 182.19 Rural LegacyMills; Gum Tree Farms 161.61 Rural LegacyBurtner107.11 Rural Legacy
Fisher 58.72 Rural Legacy
Foltz 22.35 Rural Legacy
W D Farms, LLC 49.76 Rural Legacy
Spoonire 51.47 Rural Legacy
Frye 74.96 Rural Legacy
Bonnet 34.19 Rural LegacyDreisch104.47 Rural LegacyLimekiln Road Partnership 322.66 Rural Legacy
Morgan 19.78 Rural Legacy
Morgan 206.68 Rural Legacy
Morgan 138.94 Rural Legacy
Bowes 39.71 Rural Legacy
Hirrlinger 39.76 Rural Legacy
King 145.61 Rural Legacy
Meyers 61.18 Rural LegacyVanfossen/Cogan 21.78 Rural LegacyMorgan31.84 Rural Legacy
Morgan 52.82 Rural Legacy
Sellers 182.94 Rural Legacy
Flook 122.41 Rural Legacy
Washington County, Maryland
Preserved Agricultural Lands Inventory
Ecker 110.03 Rural Legacy
Stone 138.39 Rural Legacy
Williamson 116.45 Rural Legacy
Mullendore 201.40 Rural LegacyThomas197.35 Rural LegacyPrice139.02 Rural Legacy
Weaver 140.47 Rural Legacy
Morgan 10.35 Rural Legacy
MacBride 35.76 Rural Legacy
Hillenbrand 105.96 Rural Legacy
Saville 50.58 Rural Legacy
Flook 279.00 Rural Legacy
Matheny 49.57 Rural LegacyShaw270.78 Rural LegacyPrice120.94 Rural Legacy
Alexander; Woodley Farms 162.35 Rural Legacy
Sebold 98.73 Rural Legacy
Elmer T. Cline Farm Inc.65.00 IPP
Martin, Myron and Janet 118.17 IPP
Barr, I. Bruce 115.60 IPP
Price Farms Inc.253.00 IPP
Clopper, Tricia Bowman and Suzanne Bowman
Winders 161.79 IPP
Arena, Anthony 130.20 IPP
Newcomer, Kathleen 125.10 IPP
Ziem, Robert/Ruth & Karen Bohman, Kurt Ziem &
Eric Ziem 53.34 IPP
Barr, Phyllis 90.78 IPP
Ford 173.9 MALPF
Martin 140 MALPFWeisenbaugh314.007 MALPF
Hayes 200.6 MALPF
Robbins 448 MALPF
Main 142.46 MALPF
Strite 190.2 MALPF
Byers 164.61 MALPF
Herbst 172.12 MALPF
Herbst 183.99 MALPF
Corcoran 150.14 MALPFWiles191MALPF
Cline 145.25 MALPF
Price 149.64 MALPF
Trumpower 123.3 MALPF
Shifler 153.3 MALPF
Litton 145 MALPF
Barr 30 MALPF
Barr 70.72 MALPFRoth111.91 MALPF
Stockslager 145.37 MALPF
Faith 129.62 MALPF
Faith 132.63 MALPF
Schultz 69.368 MALPF
Schultz 70.716 MALPF
Buhrman 179 MALPF
Newcomer 55.5 MALPF
Martin 97.73 MALPF
Rowland 147.67 MALPF
Stitzel 264.13 MALPF
Myers, Jr.151.08 MALPFCline253.9 MALPF
Harding 123.56 MALPF
Carbaugh 192.22 MALPF
Clark 101 MALPF
Hornbaker 107.09 MALPF
Carbaugh 192.22 MALPF
Leather 178.3 MALPF
Rohrer 123.8 MALPF
Cavanaugh 245.8 MALPFWarner79.3 MALPF
Ernst 193.137 MALPF
Downs 118 MALPF
Corcoran 158.42 MALPF
Michael 210.92 MALPF
Michael 200.04 MALPF
Downs 145 MALPF
Michael 209.01 MALPFBaker Farms LLC 115.22 MALPF
Worthington 41.14 MALPF
Downs 130 MALPF
Schnebly 152.286 MALPF
Emswiller, Charles 100 MALPF
Winters 186.144 MALPF
Ritchie 237.99 MALPF
Lohman 146 MALPFLohman146MALPF
Rowland 596.82 MALPF
Taulton 127.38 MALPF
Shriver 99.81 MALPF
Harp 150.51 MALPF
Harp 124.7 MALPF
Hunter 68.62 MALPF
Newcomer 113.28 MALPF
Churchey 183.01 MALPFDurbin100.38 MALPF
Worthington 108.92 MALPF
Harshman 226.7 MALPF
Carbaugh 144.19 MALPF
Carr 242 MALPF
Belz 247.63 MALPF
Kendle 129 MALPF
Oller 96.8 MALPFBarnhart148.9 MALPF
Ankeney 107.22 MALPF
Belz 135.15 MALPF
Coffman 260 MALPF
Ankeney 347.72 MALPF
Coffman 206.62 MALPF
Beard, Donald 135.513 MALPFLoudenslager145.04 MALPF
Total 21,928.59
Site Name
Property
Size
(acres)
Outdoor
Recreational
amentities Trails
Water
Access Other
Federal Scenic Easements (approx. 170 properties)1,872
These are mostly on private property and restrict
impacts on various aspects of scenic viewsheds (i.e.
tree cutting, structure locations)
Maryland Environmental Trust Easements ( approx. 40 properties)3,915
These are mostly on private property and restrict impacts on various aspects of enviromental concern
(i.e. State endangered species habitats, surface water
pollution, riparian stream areas)
Other private easement programs (appeox. 10 properties)478
These easements are mostly on private property and consist mostly of private non-profit land trusts that can restrict impacts on areas with specific importance to
various organizations such as Save Historic Antietam
Foundation, Mid-Maryland Trust, The Nature Conservancy, the Conservation Fund, and the Civil War Preservation Trust.
Forest Conservation Act Easements (approx. 150 properties)1,056
These easements are mostly on private property and
are part of mitigation plans required by the Forest Conservation Act when new development occurs.Maryland State Parks 22,664
Albert M. Powell FMA 66 x
Limited access, trout hatchery facility to provide for
Statewide trout stocking
Brownsville Pond FMA 4 x x
Fort Frederick SP 722 x x xFort Tonoloway SP 26 xGathland SP 117 x xGreenbrier SP 1,362 x x x
Indian Springs WMA 6,596 x x x
Islands of the Potomac WMA 66 x xLambs Knoll FT 1 xMcClellans Lookout FT 9 xPrathers Neck WMA 215 x x x
Sideling Hill WMA 2,615 x x
South Mountain SB 1,892 x xSouth Mountain SP 4,955 x xWashington Monument SP 129 x xWestern Maryland Rail Trail SP 291 x x
Weverton-Roxbury Corridor 178 x
Woodmont NRMA 3,420 x xFederal Parks 10,540Antietam Battlefield 1,937 xAppalachian National Scenic Trail 40 miles x
Chesapeake & Ohio Canal 7,840 x x
Harpers Ferry (MD Heights)763 x x
Washington County, MarylandNatural Resources Inventory
Site Name Park Type
Property Size (acres)Natural Areas Water Access Picnic Facilities Trails Hunting/Fishing Other Baseball/Softball Soccer Football Multi-use Basketball Tennis Volleyball Courts Playground Structures
Activity Building/ Recreation Center Other Notes
Agricultural Education Center Regional 55 x x
Rural Heritage
Mueseum
Horse show area, dirt track, several multi-purpose
buildings
The park provides a unique experience that
educates the visitor on the history of agriculture in the County. Contains a
museum and historic village of various historic structures to depict historic rural
life.
Black Rock Golf Course Special/Regional 301 x
Golf Course facilities including Pro Shop and Café.x
Camp Harding Community 19 x x x x 1 1 1 1 1 xChestnut Grove Community 16 x x 1 1 1 1 xClear Spring Community 15 x x 2 2 1 1 1 xDevil's Backbone Community 9 x x x x x x
Doubs Woods Community 27 x x x 1 2 3 x Arts pavilionFrench Lane Property Special/Community 37 x
Kemps Mill Community 136 x x x x 3 x Concession Stand Batting cagesMartin Luther King Recreation Center Neighborhood 2
Martin 'Marty' L. Snook Regional 78 x x x
Swimming Pool access; Par Course Fitness Trail 4 2 2 4 2 xMt. Briar Wetland Special/Community 30 x x
Pen Mar Regional 47 x x x 1
Dance pavilion that hosts summer concert series
Pinesburg Softball Complex Regional 42 x x 4 x Concession stand
Piper Lane Neighborhood 1 x x xPleasant Valley Community 8 x x 1 1 1 xSpringfield Middle Community 15 xTammanyNeighborhood3 x
Washington County Regional Park Regional 68 x x x 1 2 2 2 x Disc Golf Course
Wilson Bridge Community 1 x x x x Includes stone arch bridgeWoodland Way Neighborhood 4 x 1 2
Antietam Academy Educational - Community 35
Specialized school for students with behavioral issuesBester Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 7 1 1 xBoonsboro Educational Complex Educational - Community 59 2 1 1 4 3 6 x Outdoor trackCascade Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 10 x 1 xClear Spring Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 5 1 1 x
Clear Spring High Educational - CommunityClear Spring Middle Educational - Community
Conococheague Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 8 1 x Closed in the 2016-2017 school year
E. Russell Hicks Middle Educational - Community 37 4 3 3 xEastern Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 20 1 1 xEmma K. Doub Elementary (see South Hagerstown High)Educational - Community
Washington County Public Schools
Outdoor Recreation Amentities Field/Facility Based Recreation Amenities
2 1 1 2
Parks and Recreation Inventory, 2017Washington County, Maryland
County Parks and Recreation
6 x Outdoor track175
Fairview Outdoor Education Center Educational - Regional 102 x x x x x
specialized educational
facility focusing on environmental education.
Fountain Rock Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 17 2 2 xFountaindale Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 9 1 1 2 xFunkstown Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 12 1 1 xGreenbrier Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 9 x 1 1 x
Hagerstown Community College Educational - Regional 312 x x 2 1 1 6
ARCC that
includes indoor multi-use area and indoor track
Outdoor amphitheater; outdoor track
Hancock Elemenary Educational - Neighborhood 17 x 1 xHancock Middle/Senior Educational - Community 31 x 2 1 2Hickory Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 8 x 1 1 xJonthan Hager Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 17 1 1 x
Lincolnshire Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 8 1 1 xMaugansville Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 28 1 1 1 x
North Hagerstown High Educational - Community 34 x 2 1 1 8 2 outdoor tracksNorthern Middle Educational - Neighborhood 10 x 1 1
Old Forge Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 14 1 1 1 xPangborn Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 12 1 1 xParamount Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 10 1 2 xPleasant Valley Elementary Educational - Community 10 1 1 x
Potomac Heights Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 9 1 2 xRockland Woods Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 14 1 1 xRuth Ann Monroe Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 52 2 xSalem Avenue Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 12 1 x
Sharpsburg Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 5 1 1 xSmithsburg Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 11 1 1 x
Smithsburg Middle & High Complex Educational - Community 70 x x 3 1 1 1 6 Outdoor trackSouth Hagerstown High Educational - Community 47 x x 2 1 2 2 8 x Outdoor track
Techincal High School (See Antietam Academy)Educational - Community
Specialized educational facility for trade skillsWestern Heights Middle Educational - Neighborhood 26 1 1 2 xWilliamsport Educational Complex Educational - Community 110 x x 3 3 1 2 6 6 x Outdoor track
Winter Street Elementary Educational - Neighborhood 3 1 1 x Closed in the 2016-2017 school year
Hagerstown
Bloom Park Neighborhood 0.2 x Gazebo
City Park, Hager House Community 65 x x x x 2 1 1 x
Washington County Fine Arts Museum Historical Jonathan Hager House
Cultural Trail Community 1 x
Fairgrounds Park Regional 72 x x 4 3 3 1 x
Ice and Sports Complex
BMX track; dog park fitness trails; Funkhouser Neighborhood 5 x x 1 x
Greenawalt Park Neighborhood 0.2 xHager Park Neighborhood 6 x x x 1 1 xHamilton Park Playground Neighborhood 2 1 1 xHellaneCommunity17x31x
Kiwanis Park Community 5 x x
Monarch Butterfly WaystationMemorial Park Neighborhood 1 xMills Park Neighborhood 8 x x x x x
Municipal Golf Course Special/Regional 53 City owned 9 hole golf course
Municipal Stadium Regional 12
City owned stadium home of the Low A baseball team
Hagerstown SunsNational Road Park Neighborhood 0.25 x x x
Municipal Parks
Oswald Park Neighborhood 2 x
Pangborn Park Neighborhood 7 x x 1 1 2 x Lawn Bowling areaRidge Avenue Playground Neighborhood 2 x 1 1 xRotary Club of Longmeadow Park Neighborhood 1 x x
Staley Park Neighborhood 8 x
Swimming Pool Access (Potterfield Pool)3 xTerrapin Park Neighborhood 2 x 1 1 x
University Plaza Neighborhood 0.5
Stage for
musical performancesWheatonNeighborhood3x1111xBandshellBoonsboro
Kinsey Heights Recreation Area Neighborhood 3
Shafer Memorial Park Community 54 x x x 1 2 1 x Community CenterFunkstownFunkstown Community Park Community 77 x x x 2 1 2 xHancockBreathered Park Neighborhood 0.12Hancock Little League Park (formerly Gerber)Neighborhood 3 x 1 1 x
Joseph Hancock Jr. Park Neighborhood 1 x x xKirk Woods Community 156 x x x x 5 1
Widmyer Park Community 25 x x x Swimming Pool Access xKeedysville
Slo-Pitch Field Neighborhood 3 1Taylor Park Community 5 x x 1 xSharpsburgLonnie Lee Crampton Park Community 6 x 3 2 1 x
Sharpsburg Community Pond Neighborhood 3 x x xSmithsburgLions Community Park Community 14 x x 1 1 1 xVeterans Park Community 32 x x 1 1 x
WilliamsportBill Daub Park Neighborhood 4 x 2 2Riverbottom Park Community 5 x 3
Springfield Farm Special/Neighborhood 4
Refurbished barn used for
special events
W.D. Byron Park Community 23 x Swimming Pool Access 1 x Community Building
Antietam Dargan Community Park Community 3 x 1 1 xChewsville Park Community 11 x 3 xDownsville Community Park Community 3
Elgin Park Neighborhood 3 2 xLeitersburg Community Park Community 12 x 1 1 1 xMaugansville Park Community 6 x 3 2 xNoland Drive Playground Neighborhood 3
Ringgold Community Park Community 3 x xRohrersville Community Park Community 9 x 1 1 1 xTilgmanton Woods (District 12) Community Park Community 6 x 1 xWilson Ruritan Community 11 x x
Community and Ruritan Parks (private ownership, not included in acreage calculations)
Appendix C
Parks, Facilities & Recreation Survey
Survey Results
Online Survey Questions and Responses
2016 Survey
Washington County, Maryland
Washington County Department of Public Relations, in cooperation with the Washington County
Department of Planning and Zoning and the Washington County Parks and Advisory Board
developed and conducted a public survey to gauge the interest and participation in local Parks
and Recreation programs and facilities. The survey was launched in March 2014 and ended in March 2016. The County received a total of 435 respondents.
The survey was divided into 3 categories relating to Recreation Programs (QP), Park Facilities
(QF), and demographics (QD). A copy of the survey as well as a summary of the questions and
responses to the survey is included in this appendix.
Recreation Programs:
QP1a: Did you or members of your family participate in Washington County Recreation Programs during the past year?
Options: Yes or No
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Yes 278 66.5%
No 140 33.5%
Total 418 100.0%
Yes
67%
No
33%
QP1:Did you or members of your
family participate in Washington
County Recreation Programs
during the past year?
QP1b: Which youth programs did you participate in this year?
Options (Youth Programs): Youth Summer Day Camps, Pre-School Play Camp, Youth Swim
Lessons, Giggles and Wiggles, Youth Dance, Youth Basketball Skills Camp, Youth Tennis,
Youth Soccer, Tiny Tot Soccer, Youth Track Clubs, Youth Karate
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Summer Day Camp 44 33.1%
Pre-School Camp 7 5.3%
Swim Lessons 23 17.3%
Giggles & Wiggles 5 3.8%
Dance 9 6.8%
Basketball 13 9.8%
Tennis 10 7.5%
Soccer 10 7.5%
Tiny Tot Soccer 2 1.5%
Track 4 3.0%
Karate 6 4.5%
Total 133 100.0%
33%
5%
17% 4%
7%
10%
8%
8%
1% 3% 4%
Participation in Youth Programs
Summer Day Camp
Pre-School Camp
Swim Lessons
Giggles & Wiggles
Dance
Basketball
Tennis
Soccer
Tiny Tot Soccer
Track
Karate
Options (Youth Sports Leagues): High School Basketball, High School Summer Soccer, High
School Futsal Soccer, Girls Volleyball
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Basketball 6 13.0%
Summer Soccer 11 23.9%
Futsal Soccer 7 15.2%
Volleyball 22 47.8%
Total 46 100.0%
QP1c: Which adult programs did you or your family members participate in this year?
Options (Adult Programs – Leagues): Soccer, Volleyball, Softball
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Soccer 7 31.8%
Volleyball 11 50.0%
Softball 4 18.2%
Total 22 100.0%
13%
24%
15%
48%
Participation in Youth Sports
Leagues
Basketball
Summer Soccer
Futsal Soccer
Volleyball
Options (Adult Programs – Fitness): Walking Club, Zumba, Work Out Your Way, Ripped, Spin
Cycling, Spin Fit, Total Fitness-Williamsport, Total Fitness-HCC, Exercise in Clear Spring, Ballet, Tap Dancing, Pilates
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Walking 16 11.3%
Zumba 54 38.0%
Work Out 4 2.8%
Ripped 3 2.1%
Spin Cycling 10 7.0%
Spin Fit 4 2.8%
Total Fit-
Williamsport 0 0.0%
Total Fit-HCC 0 0.0%
Clear Spring 33 23.2%
Ballet 4 2.8%
Tap 14 9.9%
Pilates 0 0.0%
Total 142 100.0%
32%
50%
18%
Participation in Adult Programs -
Leagues
Soccer
Volleyball
Softball
Options (Adult Program – Sports): Karate, Tennis, Adult Indoor Futsal Soccer
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Karate 5 33.3%
Tennis 9 60.0%
Futsal Soccer 1 6.7%
Total 15 100.0%
Options (Adult Programs – Senior Programming): Water Exercise, Arthritis
11%
38%
3% 2% 7%
3% 0% 0%
23%
3%
10% 0%
Participation in Adult Programs - Fitness
Walking
Zumba
Work Out
Ripped
Spin Cycling
Spin Fit
Total Fit-Williamsport
Total Fit-HCC
Clear Spring
Ballet
Tap
Pilates
33%
60%
7%
Participation in Adult
Programs - Sports
Karate
Tennis
Futsal Soccer
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Water Exercise 3 75.0%
Arthritis 1 25.0%
Total 4 100%
Options (Adult Programs – Drop-in Programs)
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Volleyball 9 52.9%
Basketball 4 23.5%
Hip Hop 0 0.0%
Zumba 4 23.5%
Total 17 100.0%
75%
25%
Participation in Adult Programs
- Senior Programming
Water Exercise
Arthritis
53%
23%
0%
24%
Participation in Adult Programs
- Drop-in Programs
Volleyball
Basketball
Hip Hop
Zumba
Options (Adult Programs – Special Events): Princess Party, Park @ Dark, Spooky Sprint, Super
Heroes Party, Spring Egg Hunt, Phone Call from Santa, St. Patrick’s Day Race, Fitness
Instructor Workshops & Certifications
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Princess Party 24 16.1%
Park@Dark 23 15.4%
Spooky Spring 10 6.7%
Super Heroes 19 12.8%
Egg Hunt 10 6.7%
Santa 10 6.7%
St. Patrick's Day 53 35.6%
Fitness Instructor 0 0.0%
Total 149 100.0%
QP2: How do you find out information about Recreation Department Programs?
Options: Word of mouth, Internet, Brochures, Newspapers, Community Calendar, Other
Results:
16%
15%
7%
13% 7%
7%
35%
0%
Participation in Adult Programs - Special Events
Princess Party
Park@Dark
Spooky Spring
Super Heroes
Egg Hunt
Santa
St. Patrick's Day
Fitness Instructor
# of
Responses
% of
Responses
Word of Mouth 165 25.1%
Internet 138 21.0%
Brochures 96 14.6%
Newspapers 131 19.9%
Calendar 40 6.1%
Other 88 13.4%
Total 658 100.0%
QP3: What recreation facilities do you use?
Options: HCC, Maugansville Elementary School, Pangborn Elementary School, Rockland
Woods Elementary School, 4-Star Athletic and Fitness Complex
Results:
HCC 46 25.8%
Maugansville 58 32.6%
Pangborn 37 20.8%
Rockland Woods 23 12.9%
4-Star 14 7.9%
Totals 178 100.0%
25%
21%
15%
20%
6%
13%
QP2: How do you find out information about
Recreation Department Programs
Word of Mouth
Internet
Brochures
Newspapers
Calendar
Other
QP4: How often do you visit a community recreation elementary school facility?
Options: Daily, Weekly, Occasionally, Hardly ever
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Daily 9 3.1%
Weekly 72 24.4%
Occasionally 50 16.9%
Hardly Ever 164 55.6%
Total 295 100.0%
26%
32%
21%
13%
8%
QP3: What recreation facilities do
you use?
HCC
Maugansville
Pangborn
Rockland Woods
4-Star
3%
24%
17%
56%
QP4: How often do you visit a
Community Recreation Elementary
School Facility?
Daily
Weekly
Occasionally
Hardly Ever
QP5: Pick the Facilities that you visit.
Options: Maugansville, Pangborn, Rockland Woods, Ruth Ann Monroe
Results:
# of
Responses
% of
Responses
Maugansville 61 40.9%
Pangborn 30 20.1%
Rockland Woods 28 18.8%
Ruth Ann Monroe 30 20.1%
Total 149 100.0%
QP6: If there is a fee for a program, what would be the most convenient way for you to
pay?
Options: Check, Cash, Credit Card, Debit Card
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Response
Check 94 26.9%
Cash 16 4.6%
Credit Card 186 53.3%
Debit Card 53 15.2%
Total 349 100.0%
41%
20%
19%
20%
QP5: Pick the facilities that you
visit.
Maugansville
Pangborn
Rockland Woods
Ruth Ann
Monroe
Park Facilities:
QF1: How close are you to a County Park?
Options: <½ mile, ½ to 1 mile, 1 to 5 miles, > 5 miles
Results:
# of
Respondants
to Question
% of
Responses
<1/2 mile 44 10.9%
1/2 to 1 mile 47 11.6%
1 to 5 miles 180 44.4%
>5 miles 134 33.1%
Total 405 100.0%
27%
5%
53%
15%
QP6: If there is a fee for a program,
what would be the most convenient
way for you to pay?
Check
Cash
Credit Card
Debit Card
11%
12%
44%
33%
Park Proximity
<1/2 mile
1/2 to 1 mile
1 to 5 miles
>5 miles
QF2: Do you or a household member use any of the any of the County Parks?
Options: Yes, No
Results:
# of
Respondents
to Question
% of
Responses
Yes 325 80.2%
No 80 19.8%
Total 405 100.0%
QF3: How often do you visit our County Parks?
Options: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Occasionally, Rarely
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Daily 6 1.6%
Weekly 85 22.3%
Monthly 59 15.4%
Occasionally 177 46.3%
Rarely 55 14.4%
Total 382 100.0%
80%
20%
QF2: Do you or a household
member use any of the
County parks?
Yes
No
QF4: Please rate the conditions of the park(s) that you use.
Options: Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Excellent 135 37.0%
Good 216 59.2%
Fair 11 3.0%
Poor 3 0.8%
Total 365 100.0%
QF5: Please select the County Parks you use.
Options: Camp Harding, Chestnut Grove, Clear Spring Park, Devils Backbone, Doub’s Woods, Kemps
Mill, Marty Snook Park, Mt. Briar Wetland, Pen Mar, Pinesburg Softball Complex, Piper Lane, Pleasant
2%
22%
16%
46%
14%
QF3: How ofter do your visit our
County parks?
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Occasionally
Rarely
37%
59%
3% 1%
Park Conditions
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Valley, Ag Center, Regional Park, Wilson Bridge, Woodland Way, Black Rock Golf Course.
Results:
# of Responses
Camp Harding 15
Chestnut Grove 14
Clear Spring Park 28
Devil's Backbone 102
Doub's Woods 105
Kemps Mill 7
Marty Snook Park 213
Mt. Briar Wetland 2
Pen mar 81
Pinesburg Softball 13
Piper Lane 2
Pleasant Valley 12
Ag Center 95
Regional Park 89
Wilson Bridge 4
Woodland Way 15
Blackrock Golf 33
Total 830
0 50 100 150 200 250
Camp Harding
Chestnut Grove
Clear Spring Park
Devil's Backbone
Doub's Woods
Kemps Mill
Marty Snook Park
Mt. Briar Wetland
Pen mar
Pinesburg Softball
Piper Lane
Pleasant Valley
Ag Center
Regional Park
Wilson Bridge
Woodland Way
Blackrock Golf
QF5: Please select the parks you use.
# of responses
QF6: What events in the parks have you or your family attended?
Options: Bread baking class, Bass Masters show, Model Railroad show, Horse Show, Dog Show, Easter Egg Hunt, Master Gardeners Plant Sale, Tractor Pull, 4-H Camp, Pen Mar Concerts, Bark in
the Park, Ag Expo, Rural Heritage/Living History, Other.
Results:
Other: Dualathlons, Halfway Park Days, Dog obedience class, Muddy Mamas, Youth Summer Camp, Family Picnics, Paws on Pavement, 5k Fun Runs, Heal programs, Disc Golf Tournaments.
# of Responses
Bread Baking 2
Bass Masters 3
Model Railroad 9
Horse show 4
Dog show 2
Egg Hunt 24
Master Gardeners 26
Tractor Pull 2
4-H Camp 0
Pen Mar Concerts 16
Bark in the Park 7
Ag Expo 44
Rural Heritage 4
Other 52
Total 195
QF7: What additional activities/events would you like to see take place in County parks?
Responses: Fitness programs, music concerts, museums, track meets/running events, roller hockey,
bike trails, one day events like little kid tennis, art classes, bird watching exhibits, pick up volleyball
games, scavenger hunts/geocaching, craft shows, Zumba activities, dog parks, living history events, aquatics center, indoor turf fields, fields designed for State and Regional tournaments, camping, more swimming facilities, disc golf courses, bocce courts, movies in the parks, Petting zoos.
QF8: How do you find information about events that take place in our parks?
Options: Word of mouth, Internet, Brochures, Newspapers, Community Calendar, Other
# of
Responses
Word of Mouth 4
Internet 5
Brochures 1
Newspapers 3
Community Calendar 0
Other 11
Totals 24
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Bread Baking
Bass Masters
Model Railroad
Horse show
Dog show
Egg Hunt
Master Gardeners
Tractor Pull
4-H Camp
Pen Mar Concerts
Bark in the Park
Ag Expo
Rural Heritage
Other
QF6: What events in the parks have your or your family
attended?
# of Responses
QF9: Do you or a household member participate in league play, or organized activities at one of our parks?
Options: Yes, No
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Yes 66 17.2%
No 317 82.8%
Total 383 100.0%
QF10: What type of league/organized activity do you or a household member participate in? Options: Softball, Football, Basketball, Tennis, Flag Football, Volleyball, Little League Baseball,
17%
21%
4% 12% 0%
46%
QF8: How do you find information
about events that take place in our
parks?
Word of Mouth
Internet
Brochures
Newspapers
17%
83%
QF9: Do you or a household
member participate in league
play or organized activities at
one of our parks?
Yes
No
Frisbee Golf, Golf
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Softball 19 22.1%
Football 7 8.1%
Basketball 4 4.7%
Tennis 7 8.1%
Flag Football 3 3.5%
Volleyball 9 10.5%
LL Baseball 0 0.0%
Frisbee Golf 15 17.4%
Golf 22 25.6%
Total 86 100.0%
QF11: Please indicate the other (non-league/organized) recreational activities that you or any member of your household participates in at the parks.
Options: Family picnics, Frisbee Golf, Walking/Hiking, Nature Watching, Quiet Relaxation, Other Results:
22%
8%
5%
8%
4% 10% 0%
17%
26%
QF10: What type of league/organized activity do
you or a household member participate in?
Softball
Football
Basketball
Tennis
Flag Football
Volleyball
LL Baseball
Frisbee Golf
# of Responses
Picnics 171
Frisbee Golf 26
Walking/Hiking 218
Nature watching 108
Quiet Relaxation 121
Other 55
Total 699
Other responses: Playground, tennis, basketball, bicycle riding, running, disc golf, fishing, dog park,
lacrosse, soccer, volleyball, swimming, geocaching.
QF12: Do you utilize the public pool at Marty Snook Park and what additional amenities would you like to see added to the pool?
Options: Yes, No
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Yes 100 26.7%
No 274 73.3%
Total 374 100.0%
0
50
100
150
200
250
Picnics Frisbee Golf Walking/Hiking Nature watching Quiet Relaxation Other
Q11: Please indicate the other recreational activities you or
your household participates in at the parks.
Additional amenities: Add splash park, umbrellas for shade, kids pool, adult swim times, water slide, better locker rooms and bathrooms, more benches,
QF13: Do you use the designated pet friendly area in parks and what additional parks would you
recommend adding pet friendly areas? Options: Yes, No
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Yes 78 21.5%
No 285 78.5%
Total 363 100.0%
What additional parks would you recommend adding pet friendly areas?: All, None, Pangborn, Black
27%
73%
QF12: Do you utilize the public pool
at Marty Snook Park?
Yes
No
21%
79%
QF13: Do you use the designated pet
friendly area in parks?
Yes
No
Rock, Chestnut Grove, Pen Mar, Clear Spring.
QF14: What additional facilities/amenities would you like to see in our parks?
Results: Mountain biking, indoor pool, outdoor pool, roller hockey rink, nature trails, bike trails,
bathrooms open year round, bicycle trails, water bottle filling station, more evening classes/events,
concerts, splash park, additional handicap accessible playground equipment, fenced in playground areas,
allow metal detecting, workout equipment, more dog parks, splash park, more Frisbee golf courses,
bocce ball courts, benches, indoor sports facility, geocaching, indoor aquatics center, more walking/hiking trails, camping, more museums, more gardens.
QF15: What improvements or additions do you feel would enhance the park system?
Results: Unlock pedestrians gates, windmills at Ag Park, add tennis courts, more swing areas that combine seats for babies and adults, better hours for concessions, open bathrooms more often/year
round, bike trails, more shade for spectators along sports fields, more benches at tot lots, do a better job
of cleaning bathrooms, increase police patrols late at night, add more community pools, organized sports
are over running un-organized events, add an indoor sports complex, better landscaping and lighting,
add bocce ball courts, add artificial turf fields in County parks, more trees, better marketing of parks and events, more parks in the western area of the County, make fields more tournament friendly to bring in
more revenue, indoor skate park.
Demographics:
QD1: Gender
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Male 112 27.0%
Female 303 73.0%
Total 415 100.0%
27%
73%
Survey Demographics: Gender
Male
Female
QD2: Age.
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
under 12 4 1.0%
12-17 0 0.0%
18-24 6 1.4%
25-34 63 15.1%
35-44 139 33.4%
45-54 99 23.8%
55-64 72 17.3%
65-74 26 6.3%
over 75 7 1.7%
Totals 416 100.0%
QD3: Marital Status.
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Married 359 79.8%
Widowed 7 1.6%
Divorced 35 7.8%
Seperated 6 1.3%
Never Married 43 9.6%
Total 450 100.0%
1% 0% 2%
15%
33% 24%
17%
6%
2%
Survey Demographics: Age
under
1212-17
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
QD4: What is the highest degree or level of school you have completed?
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Less than 8th grade 3 0.7%
Some High School 35 8.5%
High School Diploma/GED 40 9.8%
Some College 46 11.2%
Associates Degree 69 16.8%
Bachelors Degree 125 30.5%
Masters Degree 84 20.5%
Profeesional Degree 0 0.0%
Doctorate 8 2.0%
Total 410 100.0%
80%
2% 8%
1% 9%
Survey Demographics: Marital Status
Married
Widowed
Divorced
Seperated
Never Married
QD5: Please list the number of people besides you living in your household with their gender and age.
Results:
Male Female
0-12 148 147
12-17 82 87
18-24 53 45
25-34 38 29
35-44 79 64
45-54 82 54
55-64 49 21
65-74 19 14
75+9 4
Total 559 465
# of Responses
1%
9%
10%
11%
17% 30%
20%
0%
2%
Survey Demographics: Educational Experience
Less than 8th grade
Some High School
High School Diploma/GED
Some College
Associates Degree
Bachelors Degree
Masters Degree
Profeesional Degree
Doctorate
QD6: Employment Status.
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
Employed 309 75.4%
Self-employed 26 6.3%
Out of work but looking 3 0.7%
Out of work not looking 0 0.0%
Homeworker 34 8.3%
Student 1 0.2%
Retired 35 8.5%
Unable to work 2 0.5%
Total 410 100.0%
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0-12 12-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+
Survey Demographics: Household
Male Female
QD7: Employment Type.
# of
Respondents
% of
Response
For-profit for wages 145 45.0%
Non-profit 53 16.5%
Local government 65 20.2%
State government 32 9.9%
Federal government 0 0.0%
Self Employed 23 7.1%
Family Business or farm 4 1.2%
Total 322 100.0%
75%
6%
1%
0% 8%
0% 9%
1%
Survey Demographics: Employment Status
Employed
Self-employed
Out of work but looking
Out of work not looking
Homeworker
Student
Retired
Unable to work
Survey Demographics: Employment Type
For-profit for wages
Non-profit
Local government
State government
Federal government
Self Employed
Family Business or farm
QD8: Housing.
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Response
Rent 42 10.4%
Own 362 89.6%
Total 404 100.0%
QD9: What is your Zip Code?
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Responses
21740 111 33.5%
21742 104 31.4%
21722 8 2.4%
21713 9 2.7%
21795 35 10.6%
21783 18 5.4%
Other 46 13.9%
Total 331 100.0%
10%
90%
Survey Demographics: Housing
Rent
Own
QD10: What is your total household income?
Results:
# of
Respondents
% of
Response
less than $10,000 15 5.6%
$10,000 to $19,999 3 1.1%
$20,000 to $29,999 10 3.7%
$30,000 to $39,999 12 4.5%
$40,000 to $49,999 22 8.2%
$50,000 to $59,999 27 10.1%
$60,000 to $69,999 29 10.8%
$70,000 to $79,999 41 15.3%
$80,000 to $89,999 32 11.9%
$90,000 to $99,999 36 13.4%
$100,000 to $149,999 13 4.9%
$150,000 or more 28 10.4%
Total 268 100.0%
34%
31%
2%
3%
11%
5%
14%
Survey Demographics: Zip Code
21740
21742
21722
21713
21795
21783
Other
6%
1%
4%
5%
8%
10%
11%
15%
12%
13%
5%
10%
Survey Demographics: Income
less than $10,000
$10,000 to $19,999
$20,000 to $29,999
$30,000 to $39,999
$40,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $59,999
$60,000 to $69,999
$70,000 to $79,999
$80,000 to $89,999
$90,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $149,999
$150,000 or more