Go to: OVERVIEW (SaveOurCounty)     DETAILS (listener)     PLANNING     SCHOOLS     ENVIRONMENT     EROSION     Report corrections & broken links to Webmaster     Get updates on local issues

Public Hearing on Duffields Subdivision, 392 houses

3-6pm Thursday, April 19, 2001, Hearing Room, 108 E Washington St, Charles Town

A subdivision is proposed on the South side of the CSX railroad tracks, east of Flowing Springs Rd, across from the Duffields train station, stretching 1½ miles east to the Job Corps Training Center.

This is farm land zoned rural, which just means the developer has to go through special zoning procedures before receiving approval to build 392 homes. Jefferson County citizens are appealing the proposal in two areas:

1st Appeal: LESA - Land Evaluation & Site Assessment: Zoning Administrator Paul Raco has scored the land as 57.47 on a scale of 0-100, where 100 is considered ideal farmland (good soil, surrounded by farms, far from city services, etc.).A score of 60 or less (less than 60% as good as the ideal farm) lets them build a dense subdivision in the middle of an agricultural, rural, area. The first appeal is based on four parts of the LESA scoring:

Percent of adjacent property farmed

Availability of public sewer

Availability of private water system

Distance to appropriate schools

2nd Appeal: Supporting Text- The developer is required to write a description of 23 issues. These are listed in the Zoning Ordinance. The purpose is so that citizens could intelligently comment on the proposed development at the first public hearing on Feb 28. Citizens objected to eight parts of the four page text as not addressing the required issue or being woefully adequate:

(5) General description of surface conditions (topography)

(6) Soil and drainage characteristics

(10) Intended improvements and proposed building locations including locations of signs

(15) Effected wildlife populations

(16) Ground water and surface water and sewer lines within 1320 feet

(19) Traffic characteristics - type and frequency of traffic; adequacy of existing transportation routes

(21) Proximity and relationship to historic structure or properties within two hundred (200) feet

(23) Relationship of the project to the Comprehensive Plan

The developer's four pages of text and the Zoning ordinance are at http://www.listeners.homestead.com

Citizens concerned about the general failure of residential growth management in Jefferson County and the current inadequacy of LESA to properly protect rural agriculture farmland should come to the Zoning Board meeting on April 19th, any time between 3-6pm. Preservation of farmland and residential growth management are major political issues in Jefferson and they deserve your attention.

Procedures: On Thursday, people may only speak about issues that were appealed, listed above. People who signed the 1st appeal, on the LESA score, get 30 minutes to present their case. Then the Zoning Administrator, Paul Raco, gets 15 minutes to reply. The developer gets 15 minutes. Then each member of the public gets 5 minutes. Then the appealers get 15 minutes to close & rebut. So the 1st appeal may last until 4 or 4:30.

Then the same schedule for the 2nd appeal, on inadequate supporting text, which may last until 5 or 6. If you're one of the 60 citizens who signed the 1st appeal, you may only speak in the opening 30 minutes or the closing 15 minutes of that appeal. You may also speak in the public comment period on the 2nd appeal, after 4pm. Other people may speak in public comment on either appeal.

Then the Board will hear public comment on Charles Town Races' request to build buildings 75 feet high, and any other items on the agenda. Then everyone leaves the room while the Board deliberates, or they may postpone their deliberation until next month. The losing side can appeal to Circuit Court within 30 days after the Board writes up their decision.

Be brief and clear. The Zoning Board of Appeals is five citizens, volunteering their time, appointed by the County Commission for 3-year terms.

For more info on this and other issues in Jefferson County, write to listener-owner@yahoogroups.com



1st Appeal - LESA Points

The County Zoning Ordinance section 6.4 requires the Zoning Administrator to rate how the land is for farming. If it rates highly for farming, it cannot be subdivided. The Zoning Ordinance is at http://www.listeners.homestead.com)

LESA item 3, Adjacent Development

More than 86% of the adjacent land is farmed and does not indicate development pressure.

Relevant Citations in the Comprehensive Plan of Jefferson County, 1994

"farmland and farming are being threatened by accelerated growth"

"measures which minimize the conversion of farmland to urban uses"

"Unregulated growth is one of the major problems for local farmers, particularly strips and islands of residential development in remote areas of the County"

"The LESA development system should be revised to encourage the development of less dense lots in the rural zone as opposed to all high density development"



LESA item 6, Proximity to Schools

The site is not "located less than 3 miles from facility", on average.

Relevant Citations in the Comprehensive Plan of Jefferson County, 1994

"Maintaining and improving Jefferson County's education system is one of the most important and urgent challenges we will face during the implementation of a comprehensive plan."

"funding... regulations... planning... and scattered residential growth have all combined to produce a crisis in our schools."

"emotional issue because it concerns the future of our children and grandchildren."

"School personnel have been forced to conduct classes in inappropriate areas"

"every school in the county lacks the space to accommodate all of the required classes or services."

"Hallways become unable to handle the increased traffic"

"Jefferson County currently has limited options for raising money for public schools. Bond issues are the main option."

"Educational facilities should be designed and constructed to meet state standards and provide adequate space for educators, staff, and support personnel."

"The impact of new developments upon educational services should continue to be assessed when residential land use is being planned, and, where appropriate, revised to assist the Board of Education in future planning for facilities."



LESA item 7, Public Water Availability

No public or central water service was available at the time the LESA points were determined.



Relevant Citations in the Comprehensive Plan of Jefferson County, 1994

"The County should adopt a policy of encouraging the construction and use of central water systems only in areas that are appropriate and designated for more intensive development by the land use plan."

LESA item 8, Public Sewer Availability

No public or central sewer service was available to the site, at the time the LESA points were determined.

Relevant Citations in the Comprehensive Plan of Jefferson County, 1994

"The plan should also be conscious of the growth policies in Jefferson County. This means that public systems should not proliferate in the farming districts."



2nd Appeal - Inadequate Supporting Text

The County Zoning Ordinance requires the developer to address each of the numbered items below, and they have not done so adequately. (The developer's statement is at http://www.listeners.homestead.com)

5. General description of surface conditions.

Some of the stream edges are marshy and frequently wet, so they are not well-defined. The trees that vegetated the area near Flowing Springs Road have been removed.

6 Soil & drainage characteristics.

They mention that some of the soils are floodplains and intermittent drainage ways, as well as having "severe" conditions for building sites. They do not define severe. They do not explain how they will work around these limitations. They propose the same density of lots & roads on these soils as on other soils.

10 Intended improvements and proposed building locations including locations of signs.

No locations are given for signs, such as the subdivision name, school, church, road names, speed limits, etc.

15 Effected wildlife populations.

They do not list any. The ordinance is not limited to rare and endangered species. Since there are significant wetlands on the property, they are important for food & habitat for animals on neighboring lands. Clearly there are birds, foxes, raccoons, etc. which will be affected. The developer has more expertise than we as citizens to identify what these effects will be.

16 Ground water and surface water and sewer lines within 1320 feet.

They ignore ground water.

19 Traffic characteristics - type and frequency of traffic; adequacy of existing transportation routes.

They ignore church, school, and railroad traffic, meaning specifically the commuters from outside the subdivision, who will use the station. They are not specific on the amount of residential traffic. They imply, without saying so directly, that there is a major problem with the curves to the south of the property. They need to say if Flowing Springs Rd is inadequate and unsafe as it now is, when improvements will be made, and whether the improvements will solve all problems, and why gentler curves will not cause more accidents at the train crossing and subdivision entrances. They do not address who will own and maintain the road to the rail station.

21 Proximity and relationship to historic structure or properties within two hundred (200) feet.

They address historic "structures" inadequately. They do not address "properties" at all. The County Assessor's map marks the property as "Darke" and it is likely to have been part of General Darke's farm. The developer needs to research this. They ignore the railroad line, which is itself a major part of our transportation history.

23 Relationship of the project to the Comprehensive Plan.

It is not one of the areas where the Plan expected dense development. It has some of the best farming soil in the county, Duffields Silt Loam. It is outside the village district, and outside the residential growth district. It is zoned rural.

The following are quotations from the comprehensive plan:

"farmland and farming are being threatened by accelerated growth" III-100

"measures which minimize the conversion of farmland to urban uses" III-102

"Unregulated growth is one of the major problems for local farmers, particularly strips and islands of residential development in remote areas of the County" III-103

"The LESA development system should be revised to encourage the development of less dense lots in the rural zone as opposed to all high density development" III-106

"Maintaining and improving Jefferson County's education system is one of the most important and urgent challenges we will face during the implementation of a comprehensive plan." III-59

"funding... regulations... planning... and scattered residential growth have all combined to produce a crisis in our schools." III-62

"The County should adopt a policy of encouraging the construction and use of central water systems only in areas that are appropriate and designated for more intensive development by the land use plan." III-26

"The plan should also be conscious of the growth policies in Jefferson County. This means that public systems should not proliferate in the farming districts." III-32