Loading...
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