Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutH_1974 Annual ReportI WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 1974 ANNUAL REPORT Board of County Commissioners Martin L. Snook, President W. Keller Nigh III, Vice -President R. Lee Downey William J. Dwyer Burton R. Hoffman Washington County Planning and Zoning Commission Donald R. Frush, Chairman William E. Dorsey, Vice -Chairman W. Keller Nigh III, Ex -Officio John C. Herbst Paul W. Hoffman David W. Sowers, Jr. Barbara B. Whitcomb Published, January, 1975 Washington County Planning Zoning Commission Court House Annex Hagerstown, Maryland 21740 The pnepanatton ob this nepoht wa4 6Lnanced in pan. .hnough a compnehensive planning pant bxom the De- pan.tmen. ob Housing and Uaban Development, ab admLn- istexed by the Maryland Depahxmen. o6 State Planning TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Preface........................................1 Goals For The County ........................... 3 Planning Organizational Chart .................. 6 Planning Agency Interrelationships ............. 7 Work Program - 701 Assistance .................. 8 Transportation Planning ........................ 14 Master Plan of Highways ........................ 16 Flood Plain Management ......................... 17 Water and Sewerage Plan ........................ 18 Historic Preservation .......................... 20 Areas of Critical State Concern ................ 21 Clearinghouse Review ........................... 22 Recreational Facility Design...... 23 County -Wide Planning Program......... ...... 24 Citizen Participation .......................... 27 Advisory Board.. 29 Capital Improvements Programming ............... 30 Tri-County Council ............................. 31 Subdivision Regulations ........................ 32 1974 Approved Subdivisions ..................... 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS (con't) rage Zoning Ordinance and District Boundary Maps... 38 1974 Zoning Map Amendments .................... 39 1974 Highlights of County Development......... 40 1974 Development Map .......................... 42 Summary of 1974 Meetings ...................... 43 The Outlook for 1975 .......................... 45 WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION COURT HOUSE ANNEX, 24 SUMMIT AVENUE TELEPHONE yq HAGERSTOWN, MARYLAND 21740 131-0110 O V EMT -238 VIIIOINIA January, 1975 Preface Citizen action to prevent the degradation of the County's orderly growth is hardly new. For several years citizens from Washington County and elsewhere, and in increasing numbers, are taking their concerns to the County government agencies, and County Commissioners. Public demand has created the pressure for total review of public spending and controls outside their normal first layer of government. We must, in the coming year, find a way to alter the attitude of disenchantment with growth in the proper places; growth that will meet the recommendations of the adopted plan, and growth that will not demand a greater share of our tax revenue in the form of strip, linear, haphazard development. It would appear that people are not really opposed to growth, but are merely reacting to the conditions which have resulted in other jurisdistions from the manner in which land use is regulated, with the resultant chaos. Unless we directly en- counter the need of corrective action to the problems of our waterways, highway systems drainage, housing, environmental pollution, and the many other considerations of development, we can only expect more outside control of local decision - making. And unless the County involves itself more in pre- ventative rather than corrective action, we can also expect a greater tax burden on all out citizens. In 1975, the Planning Commission and Staff will be taking steps where necessary to strengthen the public's confidence and to expand opportunities for the public to participate in a mean- ingful way in the decision of our Commission which, if adopted by the County Commissioners, effects every taxpayer in this County. The steps to be taken represent wide opportunity for citizen activity, and are intended to form the basis for citizen involvement at the local levels where the most important imple- mentation decisions are made. Whether these steps will result in a process that is responsive to the public's right to know and be involved will ultimately depend on how well the citizens act and use these tools. Time has long past with the apathy of a community no longer concerned with our mounting problems that come with uncontrolled hap -hazard growth. The task begun by the Commission must now be continued and strengthened by informed citizens and timely action by all Washington Countians. The job now rests with all citi- zens to learn about our activities and the planning process and must not as in the past let the decision making by govern- ment alone. We will continue our efforts to have you become involved, but its still up to you! Sincerely, L l Donald R. Frush, Chairman Washington County Planning and Zoning Commission 2 WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GOALS FOR THE COUNTY 1. Maintain a dynamic planning program based on current data and trends and aimed at meeting future growth in an orderly manner, eliminating undesirable effects, and encouraging desirable change. 2. Encourage a meaningful involvement of County citizens, agencies and organizations in the planning and development of the County. 3. Develop methods of plan implementation that protect the in- vestments of all the people of Washington County, and assure orderly growth, while providing for private initiative and imagination in developing the County. 4. Provide the basis for sound analysis of all factors affecting planning decisions, including a comparison of alternative pro- posals directed to the same objective. 5. Use of modern methods and techniques in the planning program. 6. Consider deficiencies in housing, services, and other factors which contribute to blight upon the County's environment and general welfare of its citizens. 3 7. Encourage a well balanced development of the economy. B. Consider planning in Washington County in terms of its re- lationship to the surrounding areas of which it is a part, including the Potomac Basin. 9. Determine the effect of proposed surrounding County and regional programs with regard to their economic effect on Washington County. 10. Encourage cooperation and coordination between various levels of local government to assure improved environment, and eliminate duplication of services and facilities. 11. Define the social and economic problems to be considered in future County Planning programs. 12. Encourage the orderly development of the County in a manner that assures a balance in the availability and spacing of land for all uses. 13. Encourage good community design which promotes a healthy, safe environment in which to live and work. 14. Encourage compatability between the various uses of land with- in the County. 15. Encourage development densities in keeping with the capabil- ities of the land and capacities of existing and proposed public facilities. 4 16. Encourage development of areas presently experiencing growth and which are, or may be expected to be served by public fac- ilities in the near future, prior to the development of more rural areas. 17. Prepare and keep current a Capital Improvement Program. 18. Encourage the most effective use of public and private resources within the County. 5 '.1 4) C C v CO 4p. C L r CN 0•i --U = W W E ro•r O N •01- C 1 C- H L •rd C 0 •i09- •.a 1•- W VII L ro r •N ro l O L E C G W W>IW E .C W I C^a o N O LOW TW N L)UXF)ro U w • C 3'I- r iu N E ^ 4- z N -300 E ^> al N•r C N O S E .C ^ S -9 —LC (J SO • O N ^.-. W O W 3 OO u L W oE .". W d .-r o O Cr. W E W N • •VIm (p C) N JroC C LLU3 = .C •r O •r .00) • ro — •0. N C %.O•r Cr-,3L z i) J•r d'r L C zL it z C z n ^ ^ • Omoa C C 3m W Lr'J d•r L J O •r5 0. ro W >t d v 4.'C) CE— 0m L.. 00— O O•r W Z W r Y 3 3 3 L C o it N u U U r N It W W W L N 3 I- r N C W O •r J E N C 'ti W c•ro •r > CC L C L C O C L C C O it ^ it d C R 0 1 OO Co i 1 ti a \ �/ ��`o\ �i d S I }? 3w mss\ \\\ P ti \ r�y i u V y r v S \\ \ \ \ \ WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING PROGRAM 701 ASSISTANCE The Washington County Planning Program is an ongoing effort designed to promote orderly growth and development in the County. Financial assistance as authorized by Sec- tion 701 of the Federal Housing Act of 1954, as amended, channeled through the State to the County, supported this effort during the year as the Commission completed several priority items, as well as launching a new series of pro- gram elements. Projects completed during the year, under consultant contract, included: Highway interchange District Study This study evaluates the el even major interchanges along Interstates 70 and 81, with recommendations for the best utilization of those lands currently zoned "Highway Interchange," consistent with County and Local municipal government planning objectives. The Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposal during the year, and the information contained in the study will be utilized in current revision of the Plan For The Count , after and based upon revision of the Plan, recommendations for amendment of the Zoning Ordinance will be proposed, including land use, access, set back, lot size, and design requirements for the interchange land use concept. County Administration and Management framework Stud This element provides recommendations to assure maximun participation, exchange of technical data, and coordination among all the agencies of State, County and local government that relate to planning in the County as well as complete documentation of the existing functional administrative or- ganization, an analysis of future organizational require- ments, and recommended changes in organization to meet these requirements. Many of the study recommendations relative to improve- ments in existing planning organizations were implemented by the Commission during the year. Housing Study The Housing Study provides evaluations concerning housing needs in Washington County. The program includes a statement of policies and a program of priorities geared toward the satisfaction of housing needs of the present population, as well as housing requirements generated by economic growth and in -migration. The product of this work element identifies the extent to which normal market mech- anisms will satisfy the need and to what extent public in- volvement is necessary, and recommends various techniques of financing housing in both rural and urban areas. This report contains much of the basic information needed for revision of the housing element of the Plan For The County, and will also provide a framework which to consider a program to meet the County's housing needs. The $41,200 cost for the projects discussed above was funded 75% through the 701 program, with the remain- ing 25% paid by the County. Also completed during the year was the contract for preparation of comprehensive development plans and suppor- tive ordinances for the County's municipalities, except Hagerstown. This activity is more fully discussed under the County -Wide Planning Program section of this Report on page 24 . The County paid for $36,074 of the total cost of $44,160, with the balance coming through 701 assis- tance. The Fiscal 1975 work program, as presented in the Commission's Overall Program Design, emphasized a move- ment away from consultant services to increased in-house staff capability and responsibility. The Commission has been awarded $19,350 in 701 assistance for the current fiscal year, which will be used to partially cover staff salaries for the following work items: Comprehensive Plan Update A complete revision of the Plan For The Count , Development Analysis Plan Map and Policies, will be under- taken to assure that all facets of the comprehensive plan- ning process are accurately addressed in the document. These will include: history, natural physical character- istics, population, housing, economy, public facilities, and services, land use, plan policies, and social and economic implications. The plan revisions will be accom- plished on a planning sector by planning sector basis for each of the six planning sectors identified in the Plan For The County. A minimum of two (2) sectors shall be completed in a form suitable for adoption by the Board of County Commissioners during the fiscal year. A minimum of one (1) public meeting will be held by the commission in each planning sector to provide an opportunity for citizens in- put prior to public hearings on proposed revisions. Areas of Critical State Concern Areas of critical state concern will be identified in cooperation with the Maryland Department of State Planning, as provided for by 1974 amendments to Article 88C of the Annotated Code. Each planning sector (six (6) sectors are identified in the Plan For The County) will be studied to identify potential areas of critical State concern. One (1) public meeting was held in each sector during September to determine the public's views and assure maximum citizen participation in the planning process prior to the finali- zation of recommendations. A final report (including maps and text) will be pre- pared which will recommend areas of critical state concern for Washington County in accordance with the provisions of Article SBC of the Annotated Code and guidelines issued by the Maryland Department of State Planning. Public Facilities and Services Plan A plan element will be developed to establish standards and make recommendations for public facilities; and will be a primary guide in the annual development of a Capital Im- provements Program. Consideration shall be given to the Water and Sewerage Plan for coordination and possible multiple -use 10 development of facilities. The Public Facilities Plan shall identify existing facilities and make recommendations for future needs for education, fire and police, libraries, health recreation, and public buildings. Numerous meetings with local elected bodies, county departments, community organizations and citizens will be held to obtain recommen- dations. A draft report will be completed in a form suitable for presentation. Economic Impact Study Continued growth pressure and suburban sprawl has re- sulted in several new major suburban shopping centers in Washington County which have been attributed with acceller- ating the decline of the downtown commerical center of the City of Hagerstown. An economic market study shall be in- itiated and keyed to land values, market shifts and growth patterns to determine the impact of continued commercial development. An evaluation of Washington County's financial base shall be initiated to determine costs of service del- ivery and past and emerging trends. Alternative means of financing County services shall be explored to develop rec- ommendations for optimun delivery of services at least cost. Recommended policies regarding county service delivery shall be prepared. The impact of growth pressures and commerical development shall be compared with the costs of delivery of county services and the resultant land use impact particul- arly as it effects the City of Hagerstown. A draft report on the status of progress shall be pre- pared. Fiscal 1976 Overall Program Design The Fiscal 1976 Overall Program Design will be prepared and submitted to the County Commissioners detailing the Commis- sion's work program and will be submitted as the County's appli cation for 701 planning assistance. 11 Housinu Code To further the goal of providing safe and adequate housing for County residents, a thorough review of model housing codes will be conducted. These codes will be analyzed with a view toward their adaptability and appli- cation to Washington County. A draft code shall be prepared for consideration by the Commissioners and shall include recommendations for review and implementation. Slope Density Regulations The best utilization of steep slopes is a continuing problem. Slope density regulations shall be prepared and address the best manner of maintaining the quality of the natural environment on steep slopes and minimize alteration through development. Particular emphasis shall be placed on means of controlling grading, clearing of vegetation, surface coverage by streets and structures, and protection of water- sheds and sources of public water. Attention shall be given to the best means of preserving a balanced and wise use of steep slopes. A report documenting the status of efforts to prepare slope density regulations shall be prepared. Capital Improvements Program Based upon programs and policies of the Public Services and Facilities Plan, Parks and Open Space Plan, Highway Plan, Water and Sewer Plan, and all other applicable factors, a Fiscal 1976 - 1981 Capital Improvements Program shall be prepared. Local Planning Services Planning services will be provided upon request, if approved by the Board. of County. Commissioners to the towns of Boonsboro, Funkstown, Smithsburg, Clear Spring, Sharps burg, Williamsport, Keedysvilae, and Hancock. These ser- vices will include: (1) Plan evaluation, adoption, imple- mentation, and amendment; (2) Administration of land use 12 controls through a formal agreement; (3) Liaison between county and municipal planning processes; (4) Community design and special community planning projects. Coordination rrnog°ram elements shall be closely coordinated with local, regional and state agencies to optimize data input and recommendations and to assure maximum opportunities for implementation particularly of recommendations requiring state, ARC or Federal grants-in-aid. Citizen Participation Preparation and distribution of the Planning Infor- mation Newsletter, the Commission's monthly publication, will be continued. Lectures and presentations will continue to be given upon request for discussion of Commission programs and to encourage more active public awareness and participation. The Staff will continue to be available to provide in- formation and assistance on a regular basis to the Advisory Board, Historic District Commission, and other planning re- lated organizations. The Commission shall have prepared the 1974 Annual Re- port in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.09 of Article 66B. This publication will be available for wide public distribution. Numerous public information and public hearings will be conducted on the various work elements as outlined in this contract. As of years end, the work program was proceeding on schedule, with completion of the elements in the form described above expected by the end of the current fiscal year. 13 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING The Commission and staff actively participated in two transportation planning studies during the year. In cooperation with the Washington County Transpor- tation Commission and City of Hagerstown, a study to evaluate mass transit needs in the County began in Novem- ber. Funded primarily by the United States Department of Transportation and the Maryland Department of Transpor- tation, the study will produce a policy toward the fea- sibility of Mass Transit and its development throughout the County, including all municipalities, and will provide a short-term (five-year) plan in this regard. The study is being performed under consultant contract, awarded by the Board of County Commissioners. The study will examine the history of mass transit in the County, and will inventory and analyze population economics, existing land uses, and existing conditions of the current service, to include uses and trip char- acteristics, financial status of the system, and capital facilities and equipment. From this data, the transit system's needs and opportunities will be identified, and recommendations for improvement formulated. Specific transportation strategies will be developed, and the im- pact of implementation of the strategies will be evaluated, from the standpoint of both financing and operation and management. Priorities and phasing of both non -capital and capital improvements will be presented. One objective of the study will be to evaluate mass transit as it concerns the municipalities, including the feasibility of new service, the Mayor and Council and/or Planning Commission of all the towns will meet with the Consultant to provide input. A public hearing will be conducted by the County Planning Commission, The study is expected to be complete by June 1975, and will become an element of the Plan For The Count . 14 The second transportation planning study in which the Commission and staff participated was the Hagerstown/ Washington County Comprehensive Transportation Study. Principally funded by the Federal Highway Administration and Maryland Department of Transportation, the study re- presents a management team approach with the County, City of Hagerstown, Maryland Department of Transportation and State Highway jointly supervising and coordinating the consultant effort. The study will develop, within a comprehensive plan- ning process, the immediate, short range, and long range highway needs for the Hagerstown region; examine the need for the proposed Hagerstown Beltway; and provide project priority information to State, County and Municipal gover- nments for their use in comiling their highway capital improvement needs. Coordinated implementation plans and programs will be developed, consistent with the final policy and resources of the implementing agencies and jur- isdictions. To provide for immediate solution to certain transportation and traffic problems, a TOPICS element will be included to identify problem areas where solutions could be implemented within five years, and corrective measures such as traffic control signals, signs, channeli- zation and the like will be proposed. The Commission staff actively participated in the study throughout the year in identification of transpor- tation needs, definition of the study area, development of a work program, and consultant selection, in accord- ance with State contracting procedures. Contract award is expected early in 1975, with a one year schedule for completion. Much of the information to be compiled in the study is expected to be useful in revision of the transportation element of the Plan For The County. 15 MASTER PLAN OF HIGHWAYS On November 26, amendments to the Master Plan of Highways and standards by which to implement the Plan were adopted by the Board of County Commissioners. The result of intensive study and evaluation of the County's highway system by the Commission, the amendments were proposed early in the year, taken to public hearing by the Commission in February, and by the County Commissioners in August. In order to best determine the County's highway needs, problems, and opportunities, the roadways were evaluated from the standpoint of the existing type of roadway, extend of developed frontage, function, traffic volume, accident rate, road condition, and development potential (water sewer, and zoning classifications). The amendments, which include a system of pro- posed bikeways, are intended to accomplish the fol- lowing: 1. Provide reasonable, fiscally sound recomm- endations for the design and construction of new highways. Discourage the indiscriminate use of high- way frontage on those highways which have an important transportation function. Provide specific standards and criteria for the establishment of highway classi fications. 4. Establish classifications which will re- late to and guide the nature of direct new subdivision access to highways. The amendments were effective as of the adoption date, and the Plan will become an important component of the overall Transportation Element in the revision of the Comprehensive Plan. it FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT Continued progress was made by the Commission during 1974 in procuring information necessary for effective flood plain management in Washington County. In cooper- ation with the Maryland Water Resources Administration, the Commission has requested that flood plain studies of the County's major waterways be prepared by the Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District. Supplementing the final report on the Antietam Creek, presented to the Commission in 1972, the preliminary report on the Conococheague Creek was received in 1974, with the final report expected early in 1975. In order of priority, the Corps will in the fu- ture provide studies on the Potomac River in three parts, and Licking Creek. During the year, the County, through the County Eng- ineer in cooperation with the Commission, proceeded to let a contract to delineate the extent and characteristics of flood plains for the streams and tributaries that will not be provided by the Corps of Engineers. The work on this project is scheduled for completion early in 1975. As this information is compiled, the County will have a complete and valuable flood plain data base from which to administer, and enforce the Subdivision Ordinance; Zoning Ordinance; Master Storm Drainage Management Plan; National Flood Insurance Program; and to serve other suit- able planning, design, enforcement and informational func- tions. 17 WATER AND SEWERAGE PLAN In accordance with responsibility assigned by. the County Commissioners in 1973, the Commission early in the year proceeded with revision of the County Water and Sewerage Plan, as required by regulations of the Mary- land Department of Health. The goals and objectives of providing a sound, work- able water and sewerage program for the County are as follows: 1. To protect the health, safety, and welfare of the people of Washington County by providing acceptable and adequate water supply and sani- tary sewerage facilities to the County. 2. To encourage and control residential, com- mercial and industrial growth of the County in a manner which will permit the staged develop- ment of adequate water and sewer services. 3. Provide for the qualified management of water resources in the County, in order to cope with water pollution and to conserve and maintain the necessary quality standards of streams and ground waters within and adjacent to the County. 4. Encourage through the planning process con- tinuint intergurisdictional coordination and cooperation in moving toward regional goals. 5. Provide for such ordinances, rules, and regulations as may be necessary to implement the Comprehensive Water and Sewerage Plan. The final plan, adopted by the County Commissioners on December 6, represented a cooperative and coordinated ap- proach to water and sewer planning between the Commission, the City of Hagerstown and other municipalities, Washington County Sanitary Commission, and the Washington County Health Department. Through the direct participation of these groups afl concerns were presented and all disciplines considered in development of the Plan, in arriving at a final recommendation to the County Commissioners. 18 A joint public hearing on the Plan was held by the County and City Planning Commissions on September 26, in addition to two public joint meetings after that time for the purpose of considering individual requests for inclu- sion in the Plan and to prepare final recommendations. 19 HISTORIC PRESERVATION The survey of the County's estimated 900 historic sites and structures located outside the municipalities, which began in 1973, continued through the year. Funded jointly by the County and the Maryland Historical Trust, the survey is designed to provide the foundation for pro- motion and protection of the County's wealth of historical assets, with each site being photographed, evaluated, and researched, after which the level of historical signifi- ance will be established. State Law provides that the local legislative body may by resolution or ordinance allow a tax credit against property taxes imposed for properties in an HP (Historic Preservation) zoning district when the owner restores or preserves his holdings, when an architecturally compatible new structure is constructed, or where open space is per- manently retained. In December, the Commission requested that the County Commissioners provide for such a tax in- centive. As of years end, six privately owned properties in the County were zoned HP (Historic Preservation), with the Commission's request for the tax incentive suggesting strict standards be applied (equal to those for placement on the Maryland Register of Historic Places or the National Register of Historic Places and Landmarks), in reviewing requests for that zoning classification. Information ob- tained by the survey would prove beneficial in this regard. Once a site or structure is designated an HP District, the Washington County Historic District Commission, in accord- ance with the provisions of Article 66B, independently re- gulates the,.aIterations, reconstruction, moving, or demo- lition of the exterior of any structure in the District. It is felt that the results of the survey, combined with a positive response to the tax incentive proposal,:will greatly enhance the County's historic atractions, natural beauty and rural setting, and safeguard the heritage of Washington County by preserving areas that reflect elements of the County's cultural, social, economic, political, or architectural history. 20 AREAS OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN In July, the Commission began the process of for- mulating the County's recommendations for designation of "Areas of Critical State Concern," in accordance with Legislation enacted by the 1974 session of the Maryland General Assembly which requires that the State Develop- ment Plan identify such areas, after consultation with and consideration of recommendation of local government. Upon receipt of guidelines in July from the Depart- ment of State Planning, the Commission immediately pro- ceeded on the basis of first obtaining the public's views on critical areas to the maximun extent possible, to be used as a primary consideration in developing the County's recommendations. To this end, a questionnaire was pre- pared and printed in the local newspaper, and wide expos- ure given to a series of seven public meetings which were held in August and September, on the subject. After an introductory meeting in Hagerstown in August to discuss the legislation and the County's role, a series of six public meetings were held during September, with one in each Planning Sector to determine specifically what the public felt should be recommended as a "critical area". To further solicit the public's views, a total of four- teen presentations were given at the County's secondary schools, and to various organizations. By years end, in excess of two thousand questionnaires had been completed by the County's residents. The Commission will now proceed in the next year to formulate recommendations to be presented to the County Commissioners for approval and/or modification, prior to being transmitted to the State for inclusion with the State Plan. 21 CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW In accordance with the provisions of the (Federal) Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1968, and of (Federal) office of Management and Budget Circulars A-95 and A-98, issued as a result of that Act, each State is required to establish a central unit to effect the coordination of direct Federal and specified federally assisted planning and devel- opment activities within that State in order to assure that all viewpoints are taken into account. The Department of State Planning serves this function, and in turn has requested that each County designate an agency on the local level to effect local coordination. In 1973, the Commission was as signed this function. Under the Clearinghouse procedure, the Department of State Planning forwards to the Commission, for review and comment both federally assisted projects, such as water and sewer constructions, as well as other non-federal funded programs or projects such as proposed nomination to the National Register of Historic Places, proposed railroad abandonment, excess State owned real property, etc. The Commission, in turn, accomplishes local coordination within a thirty (30) day period to assure that all appropriate local agencies and governments are given the opportunity to comment on the effect which the proposed program or pro- ject may have on their plans and programs. The Commission's and other Local comments are then sent by the Commission to the Department of State Planning to be utilized by the funding agency in evaluating the project for which assistance is being sought. A total of nineteen (19) projects were reviewed and comments forwarded during the year. 22 RECREATIONAL FACILITY DESIGN In accordance with the Commission's responsibility for preparation of design of County recreational facilities, the design process for the Halfway Community Park began in Nov- ember, in cooperation with the Board of Parks and Recrea- tion. To assure that the community became involved in the design process, the Halfway Community Park Design Committee, consisting of interested individuals widely representative of the area, was formed as a voluntary, temporary group to guide and make recommendations for the park design. In addition, a questionnaire intended to further determine the community's desires, has been prepared and widely distri- buted. Once prepared, the design will be submitted for approval to the Board of Parks and Recreation and County Commissioners. Cost of staff services utilized in the design process is re- inbursable in part through Program Open Space of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources. Design of the Ditto Farms Regional Park and Pen Mar Park are scheduled for the upcoming year. 23 COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING PROGRAM Significant progress was made during 1974 in the scope of activity and cooperation on planning matters between the County and its nine (9) municipalities. In accordance with the provisions of Article 66B, the Mayor and Council of the Towns of Hancock, Clear Spring, Funkstown, Keedysville, Smithsburg, and Sharpsburg established Planning Commissions, which combined with previously appointed Commissions in Williamsport, Boonsboro, and Hagerstown, formed a complete municipal planning system in Washington County. The Coun.ty's agreement with all municipalities except Hagerstown for the preparation of comprehensive development plans and supportive ordinances was also completed. The work was performed by a consultant in cooperation with the Commission staff, and funded by the County and the Depart- ment of State Planning. At the request of the Towns, Com- mission staff assistance continues to be provided, on a regular basis, with an estimated 200 hours expended during the past year, approximately 100 of which were in the even- ing at municipal commission meetings and hearings. Three of the municipal commissions conducted public hearings on their Comprehensive Plan during the year, with the remainder expected to do likewise by March of 1975. Throughout the process, the municipal commissions coordin- ated and directed the project for the Towns, with adoption, notification, etc. to be done by the Mayor and Council as required by Article 66B. Implementation will also be a matter to be accomplished by the municipality. The cooperative approach to planning issues established with the City of Hagerstown during 1973 continued into the year. Joint meetings were held on a quarterly basis to dis- cuss many matters of mutual concern, and the two Commissions proceeded with joint study on the Water and Sewerage Plan, and a Mass Transit Study, to include development of a work program, contracting arrangements, and required local funding and staff services. Joint public hearing and formulation of recommendation to the County Commissioners on the Water and Sewer Plan brought that project to completion, and it was agreed to continue with this approach and all future water and sewer planning activities, as well as joint con- sideration of planning for the Hagerstown airport and high- ways effecting both jurisdictions. 24 The memberships of the municipal Commissions are listed below: BOONSBORO PLANNING COMMISSION Earl L. Gillespie, Chairman Hillard Hull, Vice-Chariman Douglas G. Bast Howard F. Long Stuart Mullendore Sara Sweeney CLEAR SPRING PLANNING COMMISSION Carl L. Brown, Chairman John G. Corbett, Vice -Chairman John L. Downs Jesse L. Hull, Jr. C. Harold Snyder FUNKSTOWN PLANNING COMMISSION Robert E. Shobe, Chairman Henry Manspeaker, Vice -Chairman Donald C. Brake Henry J. C. Harp Gerald C. Hicks Gail A. Mongan John R. Smith HAGERSTOWN PLANNING COMMISSION C. Robert Dean, Chairman Dennis Miller, Vice -Chairman Emma Bartles John Corbett Francis E. Gift Yvonne LaPole 25 HANCOCK PLANNING COMMISSION David W. Sowers, Jr., Chairman Palmer F. Hess, Vice -Chairman Albert G. Creek Kingson W. Exline William E. Golden Jack Steiner Marion R. Thomas KEEDYSVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Kenneth S. Ellis, Chairman Bobby R. Slick, Vice -Chairman Grace Fleming Lawrence E. Mitchell Martha B. Taylor SHARPSBURG PLANNING COMMISSION Frederick Mose, Chairman Donald Kretzer, Vice -Chairman Elta Hamilton Theodore Hebb Edna Hoover Fred Remsburg Eileen Whisner SMITHSBURG PLANNING COMMISSION Glenn D. Fishack, Chairman Homer L. Myers, Vice -Chairman Homer J. Cavanaugh, III Simon Clopper Joseph L. Ross Joseph E. Schaller Lester S. Vannoy WILLIAMSPORT PLANNING COMMISSION L. Beard Miller, Chairman Robert E. Kuczynski Maynard L. Patterson, Jr. Warren Seymour, Jr. Walter W. Teach William H. Eyler William Grimm 26 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROGRAM In January, the Commission adopted a far reaching set of proposals designed to increase the public's involvement in the planning process. Most of the program elements were implemented during the year, and include: - Provision of planning reports and documents to libraries and schools; - News releases on items of public interest; - Expansion of the Planning Information News- letter (PIN), to include direct mailing to 430 individuals by years end; - Establishment and advertisement of a Speaker's Bureau, whereby a speaker is provided at no cost to any organization or group; - Staff policy meetings on a regular basis, to coordinate Commission policy and assure dis- simination of correct information to the public; - Expansion of planning assistance to the mun- icipalities, at their request; - Sharing of project responsibility with com- munity groups (Halfway Park Design) - Formal survey of public opinion on planning issues (Areas of Critical State Concern) - Radio broadcasts announcing current planning matters, commenting on local planning issues, and announcing future public hearing dates and agendas; - Change in meeting format, through display of graphics, seating arrangements, and first attention to matters on which citizens are in attendance; 27 - Establishment of civic groups for response to planning issues (Community Facilities and Services Plan, Land Use Plan Revision, Sector Committees); - Evening hours, for a total of six (6) nights from February through May, as staff manned the Commission office to provide a more con- venient time for those wishing to conduct business. Terminated in May due to lack of response. In addition, the Commission throughout the year con- tinued its long standing "open door" policy, with direct lines of communications with the public kept open at all times through office visits, telephone, and correspondence. The remaining portions of the program, which hope- fully will be implemented in the next year are television broadcasts, an open house at the Commission office, and establishment of planning courses at Hagerstown Junior College. With the implementation of these policies, the plan- ning process will become more effective, plans will be more easily implemented, and the public's role continually expanded. ADVISORY BOARD In its efforts to further involve the public in the planning process, the Commission in December 1972, appointed an Advisory Board. With membership representative of the six (6) planning sectors, youth, real estate, farming, law, conservation, less fortunate, and minorities, the Board per- forms the following functions; Discuss and make recommendations on planning goals and objectives. - Survey social, economic, and physical condi- tions to include recreational facilities, parking, traffic and transportation, and re- location housing problems. - Recommend coordinated land use practices. - Provide assistance in making planning infor- mation available to the public. - Review practices and functions involved in planning administration and made recommenda- tions thereon. - Perform other duties as may be requested by the Planning and Zoning Commission from time to time. During the year, the Board provided recommendations on such items as zoning amendments, revisions to the County Highway Plan, revision of the Water and Sewerage Plan and the Highway Interchange Study. The Board also participated in a Citizen's Advisory Committee on a Multi -Service Center Study conducted by the Department of State Planning. A Commission staff member is assigned as liaison to the Board, which meets regularly the second Monday of each month. The Boards' membership includes William Wolford Jr. (Chairman), Austin (look, Mrs. Marguerite Snyder, Mrs. James A. Lucas, Leonard Lowry, Vincent Groh, Richard Bowers, John Newcomer Jr., Dennis Miller, Hugh. Middlekauff, Libby Harp, Susan Alexander, Michael Driesbach, and Daris Phillips. 29 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMMING In April, the FY 1975-1980 Washington County Capital Improvements Program was presented to the County Commis- sioners in accordance with the requirements of Article 66B. The result of compiling, evaluating, and screening county departmental requests for capital expenditures, the program was prepared by the Commission in cooperation with all County agencies, the County Auditor, and County Account- ant. With a six -year program and first -year budget, the Program is intended to provide the County with the abil- ity to accomplish advance financial planning on a project basis, and to identify and make full use of all sources of outside funding. In this regard, the Program can be used to effectively implement plans and programs for public fac- ilities as they are required, while being affordable within the fiscal structure of the County government. Categorical groups for capital projects in the program include: 1) Roads, Highways and Bridges; 2) Storm Drainage Facilities; 3) Educational Facilities; 4) Office Space; 5) Solid Waste Facilities; 6) Water and Sewerage Facilities; 7) Transportation Related Facilities; 8) Parks and Recrea- tional Facilities; 9) Law Enforcement, Safety, Corrections; 10) Cultural Facilities. The Program is continuous, with annual revision to insure that during each fiscal year proposed capital pro- jects are analyzed and priorities re-evaluated, based on financial conditions and needs in the County. During July, the Commission Chairman and Executive Director also met with the Mayors and Councils of the municipalities to obtain their capital improvements needs. This information was compiled by the Commission, and pre- sented by the County Tri-County Council Delegation to the Board of County Commissioners for establishment of priori- ties, in the hopes of securing a larger share of outside funding on the basis of a consolidated County Municipal capital improvement program, as well as to provide the municipalities with the other benefits of the programmed approach discussed above. Priorities were not established on a County -municipal project by project basis during the year. 30 TRI-COUNTY COUNCIL FOR WESTERN MARYLAND A Local Development District under the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Council's area is Washington, Allegany, and Garrett Counties. As a regional organization, the purpose of the Council is to provide the following services to local governments in the region: Coordination of plans and private agencies range of development resources of the regi priate counsel and se through liasion with agencies; and projects with public concerned with the broad of the human and actural on, and rendering appro- rvices to such agencies the proper governmental - Administration of grant in -aid projects, parti- cularly those related to the Appalachian program, to include preparation of grant applications, and assisting local governments in initiating, devel oping, coordinating, and administering economic development program; - Provide technical planning assistance to county and local planning commissions. - Provide technical assistance in relation to flood problems through a Flood Management Coordinator. During the year, the Commission and staff participated in review and revision of the proposed Appalachian Maryland Development Plan (AMDP), which will serve as the guide for the Region's development, and accordingly for allocation of grant issues. Additionally, the Commission and staff assisted in preparation of requests for Appalachian monies for County and municipal capital improvement projects, based upon the County Capital Improvement Program, and the collection and completion of municipal capital improvement needs. The County's representatives on the Council are Martin Snook, Burton Hoffman, Donald Frush, E. Ray Enders, J. Maury Werth, Mayor Varner Paddack, and Bruce Clipp. Mr. Frush serves as vice -Chairman ofthe Council, and along with Messrs Snook and Paddack on the Executive Board of the Council. 31 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Administration of the County Subdivision Ordinance continued as a major activity of the Commission during the year. Comparative figures for 1973 and 1974 are as follows: 1973 - Approved Category Number Lots Acreage Residential 169 581 1485.2 Commercial 11 11 35.0 Industrial -Institutional 8 8 37.5 Simplified 164 164 1365.3 TOTAL 350 764 2923.0 Disapproved - 72 Acreage - 1780.3 1974 - Approved Category Number Lots Acreage Residential 132 294 989.0 Commercial 3 3 8.7 Industrial -Institutional 7 7 95.4 Simplified 132 132 945.7 TOTAL 274 436 .8 Disapproved - 32 Acreage - 509.0 The rate of subdivision activity showed a decrease in all categories, with a total of 420 plats of all types sub- mitted and finally acted upon in 1973, as compared to a total of 306 in 1974. Not shown in the statistics, however, are a total of 552 lots consisting of 437.5 acres which reviewed preliminary but not final approval during the year. Had these subdivisions been submitted for and given final approval, the number of approved lots for development would have shown an increase for 1974. 32 As indicated on the 1974 Development Map on Page 42 subdivisions were widely dispersed. geographically during the year. The concentration of subdivision activity, how- ever, was in Planning Sector E and 11, with final approvals for development of 141 lots (241.5 acres) and 91 lots (483.2 acres) respectively. To,best serve the public, the Commission during the year continued its policy designed to expedite and stream- line the subdivision process for simplified plats (not for development) and one and two -lot single-family residential plats, which account for the majority of subdivision appli- cations. With this policy, the Executive Director, in accordance with authority delegated by the Commission under the provisions of Article 66B, may simultaneously grant pre- liminary and final approval, provided that and as soon as all subdivision requirements are met. This eliminates the practice of placing these plats on an agenda for action by the full membership of the Commission, and saves the sub- division applicant time and cost as two separate plat sub- missions are no longer needed. • Additionally, the Commission continued to provide for preliminary and final approval of plats at one meeting, ir- respective of the number of lots, which are prepared in final form, which meet all subdivision requirements, and which require no additional information. Again, time and cost savings result for the applicant. To assure that the impact of larger subdivisions is most fully considered, a policy was adopted requiring that all commercial and industrial, and residential plats in excess of ten (10) units, be in form for consideration and placed on an agenda a minimum of ten (10) days prior to a Commission meeting, to provide ample time for Commission review and field inspection, as necessary. The policy of both preliminary and final approval at one meeting assures that no time is lost for the applicant as a result. Regular bi-monthly meetings of reviewing agencies, Commission staff, consultants, and applicants, for the pur- pose of monitoring the status of subdivision plats, continued throughout the year. The preliminary consultation, to allow for agency review and comment prior to formal plat subdivision, was utilized more extensively than in any previous year. 33 1974 SUBDIVISION APPROVALS Date Subdivision Lots Acreage Approved Clayton E. Violet 1 3.8 1/04/74 Ezra B. Martin Lot 1 1 1.0 1/07/74 Daniel Secrest Lot 6 1 1.2 1/14/74 Fay N. Barkdoll 1 .8 1/16/74 Clarence V. Witmer 1 1.1 1/21/74 Charles H. Wade 1 3.8 1/21/74 Hopkins Ridge 7 22.5 1/24/74 James Kao 1 10.0 1/25/74 Henry Siarkowski 1 2.2 1/25/74 Richard K. Hershey Lot 3 1 5.1 1/25/74 Rust-O-Leum 1 15.2 2/04/74 Dominick J. Perini 1 2.3 2/04/74 Mountain Vistas 11 118.2 2/04/74 Dorine I. Carty Gallion 1 16.3 2/05/74 Richard K. Hershey Lot 1 1 2.1 2/13/74 Robert Poffenberger 1 6.6 2/13/74 Cohill Estates 6 50.9 3/04/74 Opequon 1, Sec. 2 6 10.5 3/04/74 Philip K. Snow 2 2.1 3/04/74 John L. Inman 1 5.6 3/13/74 Earl S. Trumpower 1 3.0 3/13/74 Prudence Newman 1 1.0 3/18/74 Opequon II, Sec. 1 7 8.5 3/18/74 Roadway Express 1 39.0 3/18/74 Hills Department Store 1 11.8 3/18/74 Fairplay Farms, Sec. B 22 69.9 3/18/74 H. Don Smith 2 40.3 3/20/74 Reuben Horst Lot 1 1 1.0 3/22/74 Victor Barnhart Lot 3 1 1.0 3/26/74 Andrew T. Luther, Jr. 1 1.0 3/28/74 Alvey R. Mowen Lot 4 1 1.0 4/01/74 Donald Keener 3 3.6 4/01/74 Charles Repp 1 5.1 4/04/74 Robert Nelson Myers 1 3.2 4/15/74 Greenhill Development Sec. C 5 5.1 4/15/74 Charles Strother, Sec. 1 8 10.3 4/15/74 Washington Four 21 253.2 4/15/74 John T. Chambers 2 6.3 5/01/74 Clyde B. Tucker Lot 2 1 .7 5/06/74 Richard Kesselring 3 2.8 5/06/74 W: Lee Sterling 1 1.6 5/06/74 Leo Rocca 1 3.3 5/07/74 D. Richard Martin 3 5.9 5/07/74 34 1974 SUBDIVISION APPROVALS (con't) Date Subdivision Lots Acreage Approved Earl H. Stouffer 2 2.6 5/13/74 Hilda V. Line 1 1.0 5/13/74 Carson Johnson 1 3.1 5/13/74 Hamby Acres 2 2.0 5/16/74 Paul Johnson 1 1.3 5/17/74 Arthur Fouche 1 11.0 5/20/74 Woburn Estates Sec. 4 7 23.1 5/20/74 Charels Strother, Sec. 2 5 7.1 5/20/74 Charles F. Tabler, Parcel A 1 1.1 5/22/74 Robert Carr, Lot 1 1 .9 5/23/74 Robert Eaton 1 6.0 5/31/74 Countryside,Sec. B 13 14.1 6/03/74 Onduline - U.S.A. 1 11.6 6/03/74 Charles R. Clopper Lot 1 1 1.1 6/05/74 Madge E. Carter 1 3.0 6/06/74 Clinton & Louise Rutherfort 1 2.6 6/06/74 Daniel Secrest Lot 5 1 1.0 6/11/74 Dehaan Subdivision 2 1.7 6/11/74 Joseph R. Howell 1 8.1 6/11/74 Lu Rose Estates 8 4.8 6/17/74 Allegheny Power Service 1 3.9 6/17/74 Isaac Norris 2 17.4 6/17/74 Golden Fleece Estates Lot 3 1 4.5 6/20/74 Paul B. Shade 2 2.0 6/20/74 Mason-Dixon Lines 1 11.6 7/01/74 Conserve -It 1 20.0 7/01/74 High's Dairy Store 1 .5 7/01/74 Hickory Elementary School 1 12.5 7/01/74 June Avenue Heights 2 2.3 7/09/74 Reuben Horst Lot 2 1 1.0 7/11/74 Gothard Sekula 1 .9 7/23/74 Clarence Showalter 1 1.5 8/05/74 James Reed 1 1.0 8/05/74 South Mountain Racquet Club 1 5.7 8/05/74 Oak Ridge Town Sec. III 50 units 5.0 8/05/74 John S. Shank 8 8.1 8/05/74 John Kirk 2 3.0 8/08/74 Kenneth Lang 1 3.1 8/20/74 James W. Smith 1 .9 8/23/74 35 1974 SUBDIVISION APPROVALS con' t) Date Subdivision Lots Acreage Approved Clifton Churchey 1 3.0 9/03/74 James C. Houser 1 3.0 9/04/74 Sarah K. Eby 1 1.0 9/05/74 Alba Mathias 1 8.4 9/05/74 Opequon II, Sec. 3 1 .9 9/05/74 Harry Martz 1 4.2 9/05/74 Joseph L. Thomas, Jr. 1 1.0 9/06/74 Edna Cave Lot 6 1 1.0 9/06/74 Melvin Liller Lot 2 1 2.6 9/06/74 Dr. Trumer Wagner 1 9.5 9/06/74 Jeffery Poffenberger 1 3.8 9/13/74 Ernest Moore Lot 1 1 1.0 9/25/74 Ronald Keyton 1 3.2 9/25/74 Richard Weddle 1 1.0 9/26/74 Golden Fleece Estates Lot 4 1 3.1 9/30/74 Glenn Eby Lot 2 1 1.1 9/3-/74 Ronald Flook 1 3.0 10/02/74 Philip S. Petry Lot 1 1 1.6 10/04/74 Bent Willow Farm Sec. A 6 15.1 10/07/74 Greenhill Development Sec. D 5 12.7 10/07/74 Isaac Norris 1 5.3 10/07/74 Doris M. Pyles 1 3.0 10/15/74 James Horn 1 .7 10/21/74 Ronald Flock 1 1.1 10/21/74 Mr. & Mrs. Ralph Metz 2 1.0 10/21/74 Bonnard J. Morgan 1 6.9 10/24/74 Isaac W. Norris 1 3.6 10/29/74 Harvey Poffenberger 1 8.4 10/29/74 Kershner's Acres 1 11.4 10/29/74 Beatrice B. Grove Lot A 1 1.1 10/29/74 Martin Samuel Shuck 1 1.3 11/01/74 Ronald E. Shaw 1 1.1 11/04/74 Clingan Hills 4 3.7 11/04/74 Lu Rose Estates Sec. B 23 13.8 11/04/74 Steve L. Smith 1 3.0 11/12/7 Anna Mae Miles Haynes Lot 6 1 2.2 11/15/74 Joseph E, Keefer Lot 2 1 1.0 11/15/74 Golden Fleece Estates Lot 5 1 3.0 11/15/74 Ruth Aldridge 2 2.4 11/20/74 James Flowers 1 1.0 11/26/74 Charles Resh 4 3.6 12/02/74 David T. Fraley 5 17.3 12/02/74 36 1974 SUBDIVISION APPROVALS con't Date Subdivision Lots Acreage Approved Lindy Hanes 1 1.3 12/09/74 Paul Shade - Lot 3 1 1.5 12/09/74 Bronis L. Loudenslager 1 1.0 12/11/74 Anna Mae Miles Haynes 2 3.7 12/13/74 Harry Wolfe - Lot 3 1 26.0 12/18/74 Harry Wolfe Lots 1&2 2 21.4 12/18/74 Robert E. Poffenberger 1 3.0 12/18/74 37 ZONING ORDINANCE AND DISTRICT BOUNDARY MAPS In August, the administrative zoning permit function of the Commission was transferred to the newly created Department of Permits and inspections, which assumed re- sponsibility for administration of all County permit re- quirements. The year remained a significant one for the Commis- sion on zoning matters, however, as three (3) public hearings were held for the purpose of making recommenda- tions to the County Commissioners on application for amendment to the zoning text and maps, in accordance with the provisions of Article 66B. A summary of this activity follows: Commission Recommendat No. App. Map 16 6 Text 41 39 TOTAL 57 45 County Commissioners ion Decision Disapp. App. Disapp. 10 9 7 2 36 5 12 45 12 Text amendments, most of which were initiated by the Commission, were designed to provide flexibility, and clar- ity, particularly as they relate to yard, sign, and mobile home requirements. Other amendments proposed by the Com- mission and adopted by the County Commissioners provided for deletion of previously permitted incompatible uses in the Agricultural District, and more explicit requirements for granting of Special Exception -uses in the Agricultural, Conservation, and Local Business District. Approved map amerrdments are shown on th-e following page. Recommendations on these applications were made by the Commission in accordance with -the factors to be considered as required by Article 66B, and as these pro- visions are further delineated in the Zoning Ordinance. 38 I CASE NO. CHANGE ACRES CONFORMS TO PLAN Rl 37 RR to BL 8.0 Yes `- R1 36 A to IM i0.0 No a'qr 5 3 BL "o RS 1.65 Yes. HZ -ST Unzoned to HP 75 Yes - .n - ,'-I .-. RZ ,B HI to Pi 102.0 Yes `-. HZ -Si RS 7o RCS 26.43 F>to .•r --'PI ft °S5 A toSS 29,0 No € `� — i Rr 70 A i© F4P 4.33 Yes ��° " ie Sca , �, �7 1974 Highlights of County Development 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission granted final approval to 274 subdivisions, totaling 2038.8 acres Among these approvals were: A. Oak Ridge Towne, Section 3 - Located on Larch Avenue, which added 50 units to the County's first conventional townhouse de- velopment. B. Other residential subdivisions of 20 or more lots and their general locations included Fairplay Farms, Section B (Down- ville), Washington Four, (Downsville), Lu Rose Estates, Section B (Paramount). C. Roadway Express, a major trucking firm, for a terminal on East Oak Ridge Drive. D. Mason-Dixon, another major trucking firm, for a terminal on Mason-Dixon Road near State Line. E. Onduline, a French based roofing material material manufacturer, for a plant in the Taylor Industrial Site near Williamsport. F. Conserve -It, for a recycling facility in the Hopewell Industric Industrial Park on Sharpsburg Pike. 2. Board of Education projects included: A. Construction of the Hickory Elementary School on Eckstine Road in Halfway. B. Major addition to Boonsboro High School The development listed above is depicted on the 1974 Development Map. These developments were consistent with each other, consistent with the adopted comprehensive de- velopment plan, and consistent with adopted plans of all 40 state and local jurisdiction that have responsibility for financing or constructing public improvements necessary to implement the County Plan. Industrial Development New industry, designated , was located in industrial parks or other locations which are eminently suitable for industrial use, divided into small tracts according to a comprehensive plan for occupancy by a group of industries, having necessary streets and utilities. Subdivisions Designated •, subdivisions included a range of housing types from single-family to multi- family structures, with provisions for varia- tions in the design of these areas and their related facilities. Varying desities were also permitted, dependent upon the type of development, location, degree of public improvements available, and compli- ance with these factors as exhibited in the Washington County Zoning Ordinance. 3. Community Facilities Designated ® , these facilities are all part of the current building program of the Board of Education. Existing and potential needs of students, irrespective of these new facilities were located to best serve the existing school district boundaries, incorporated area bound- aries, or other political or district boundaries. 4. Transportation Designated®, these road reconstruction and bridge projects are in accordance with the policy of the Plan For The County, of increasing the capacity, efficency, and safety of the present County Roads System by utilizing the existing County roadways. C!I I "YR \ a t. o 'T { '. L � � 0 1 ... WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND .:. t 1974 DEVELOPMENT MAP s i 'a LEGEND Residential (Subdivisions, Apartments, Mobile Home Parks)`,v';a�,•; O Industrial (New and Expanded) :- ! r" Commercial Community Facilities Transportation (Road Reconstruction Projects, Bridges) _, •^"° ;i 6J I. Sc ale ® • .moo woo r +; - 1, '°r noon SUMMARY OF 1974 MEETINGS TYPE NUMBER Regular 18 Special 8 Joint with Hagerstown 5 Workshops 23 Critical Areas 23 Public Hearings 7 Public Meetings 88 Total 172 Indicative of the scope of it's activity and demands of the work program, the Commission conducted and/or participated in numerous meetings during 1974, with a yearly total of 172 as compared to 123 during 1973. Bi-monthly meetings held through July, with that time until the end in 1975, the Commission meetings, to be held as Monday. for conduct of business were one regular monthly meetings from of the year. Beginning early will return to two regular monthly previously on the first and third Eight (8) special meetings were held as needed for the purpose of discussing planning issues and activities. as well as five (5) joint meetings with the Hagerstown Planning Commission for discussion and consideration of planning matters of mutual concern Twenty-three (23) workshops were called in order to provide for continuous review and preparation of planning projects. Seven (7) public hearings were called in order to determine the public's views on amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, Highway Plan, for consideration of the Highway Interchange Study, and Water and Sewerage Plan. As discussed elsewhere in this report, the Commission actively sought the public's views on Areas of critical State concern, with a total of twenty-one (21) meetings with the general citizenry, at the schools, and with various clubs and organizations. 43 THE OUTLOOK FOR 1975 The coming year offers the opportunity for a high level of accomplishment of activities integral to the County's planning program and objectives. Items to be given priority during 1975, which will improve the planning process within the County are as follows: 1. Completion and implementation of the current fiscal year work program, and expansion of this effort during 19.75 to provide the County with a detailed revision of the Plan For The County from which to establish land use policy and make wise land use decisions; review and analysis of land use controls to propose implementation measures; a complete inventory of housing conditions from which to propose measures for meeting the County's housing needs and an economic study from which to determine the financial impact of development. 2. Established efforts to encourage citizen par- ticipation in the planning process must be strength- ened and expanded, to assure that the public's needs and desires are fully identified and considered. Citizen Committees are being organized to partici- pate in development of programs and projects. 3. A consolidated County -municipal approach to Capital Improvements programming is proposed to obtain maximum funding assistance, and so that the immediate and longer range capital improvement needs may be planned and provided in an orderly and efficient fashion based on evaluation and estab- lishment of priorities compatible with the finan- cial resources of the County and its municipalities. 4. The Commission must strengthen and expand its contact and working relationship with the various local, State, and Federal agencies involved with the planning program, drawing on these groups for exchange of information and cooperation on all matters of mutual concern. A minimum of thirty- six (36) such agencies have been identified. 45 5. The continuance and expansion of the cooper- ative efforts established with the municipalities will be emphasized. A Council of Planning Com- missions is proposed, to provide for a.forum for regular exchange of information and a more coordin- ated approach to planning matters. As requested, the County should continue to provide the current level of planning services to the municipalities, as well as offer an expansion to assist the smaller municipalities. Joint efforts with the City of Hag- erstown will continue. 46