Lancaster County shoreline conservation and development plan

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

LLANCASTER COUNTY SHORELINE
3 ~CONSER VATION AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~INOMTNCE

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Table of Contents U.S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE N"A/
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
�"234 SOUTH HOPSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON ,I SC, 2- I24

Acknowledgements -----------------------------------------------------------------------------I
Executive Summnary ---------------------------------------------------------------------------.ii
I. Introduction --------------------------------------------------------------------------------.1
H1. Resource Analysis -------------------------------------------------------------------------.4
A. WATER -----------------------------------------------------4
A. 1. Groundwater -----------------------------------------------------5
A. 2. Surface Water ----------------------------------------------------8
B. WETLANDS -..............................................................11
C. SHELLFISH --------------------------------------------------------------- 12
D. FLOOD HAZARDS --------------------------------------------------------12
E. PUBLIC ACCESS --------------------------------------------------------- 14
MI. Water Management Options .......................................................-.1.5
A. INTRODUCTION -------------------------------------------------------- 15
B. PRIORITY WATER BODIES ---------------------------------------------16
C. GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREA DESIGNATION - ---------18
D. DRASTIC MAPPING -----------------------------------------------------19
E. WATER CONSERVATION ----------------------------------------------20
IV. Implementation Tools -...............................................................21
A. INTRODUCTION -------------------------------------------------------- 21
B. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -----------------------------------------------22
B. 1. Groundwater ----------------------------------------------------23
B. 2. Surface Water -------------------------------------------------- 24
B. 3. Soils -------------------------------------------------------------- 25
B. 4. Wetlands -------------------------------------------------------- 25
B. 5. Shellfish --------------------------------------------------------- 26
B. 6. Coastal Flood Hazards ------------------------------------------ 27
B. 7. Shoreline Erosion ----------------------------------............28
3 --, B. 8. Public Access --------------------------------------------------- 28
C. ZONING ------------------------------------------------------------------- 29
D. SUBDIVISION ----------------------------------------------------------- 36
0_: E. FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE EVALUATION ------------------------- 43
F. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL ------------------------------- 45

Property of CSC Library
E__

V. Land Management Area Delineation ---------------------------52
A. INTRODUCTION------------------------------52I
B. 50 FOOT CONTOUR----------------------------54
C. 600 FOOT WATERFRONT SETBACK --- - --------------54I
D. CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION ACT CRITERIA --------55
E. RECOMMENDATIONS --------------------------56
VI. Conclusion-----------------------------------------57
References-------------------------------------------58I

Acknowledgements

The entire project team would like to express sincere appreciation for the
opportunity to apply the knowledge and skills acquired in the preparation of this
document. It is a pleasure to work for a County with such a forward looking attitude
toward resource management issues. A special note of gratitude is In order to the Board
of Supervisors and the Planning Commission for allowing us to present our ideas for their
consideration as well as to William Duncanson, Lancaster County Land Use Administrator.
Next, we would like to acknowledge the efforts of the Northern Neck Planning District
Commission and, especially, Colin Powers for his dedication to the project and his
diligence as project co-coordinator. Dr. Timothy Beatley also deserves mention for his
efforts as project co-coordinator, sharing his extensive knowledge and expertise, and his
confidence in our abilities. Finally, we would like to acknowledge those who came before
us in completing phase one of this project: Rupert Friday, Bill Gladden, Lee Goodwin,
Peter Hill, Bill O'Beirne, Peyton Robertson, and Liz Sigal who prepared Lancaster County
Shoreline Management Study Preliminarv Results. Their work provided a solid
foundation from which to proceed in considering resource management policy options.
The funding for this project originated with the United States National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) through the Coastal Zone Management
Program. The Virginia Council on the Environment received funding from NOAA for
Virginia's Coastal Resource Management Grant Program. The Northern Neck Planning
District (NNPDC) obtained funding from the state program, and the NNPDC and the
University of Virginia Division of Urban and Environmental Planning arranged to utilize
this source of funding to undertake this project (phases 1 and 2).

Project Coordinators
Collin Powers
Dr. Timothy Beatley

Editors
Jennifer Burmester
Bill Gladden

Project Team
Jennifer Burmester
Custis Coleman
Bill Gladden
Pamela Harris
Peter Hill
Marianna Knappenberger

Executive Summary

The following overview provides policies which can have a positive impact on the
environment and can improve the ability of the County to sustain its current economic
growth. This report was researched and compiled by six Masters students at the
University of Virginia. This study is the final step in the preparation of a shoreline
element for the County's comprehensive plan.
This report provides an overview of the resources, examines water quality
management policy options, enumerates an assortment of goals, objectives and policies
for managing specific resources, and provides implementation alternatives. The
comprehensive plan section considers appropriate shoreline goals, objectives, and
policies for each resource analyzed in this report. The current zoning, subdivision,
erosion and sediment control, floodplain, and wetlands ordinances were reviewed and
amendments were suggested. Finally, alternative land area management delineations and
recommendations were included for the consideration of the County. To the best of our
ability, we have provided Lancaster County with information necessary to comply with
the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act.

WATER MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
� Groundwater Management Area: The most productive, long term policy for the County
to pursue would be to work with other jurisdictions in the Northern Neck to develop
an awareness of the interjurisdictional nature of groundwater management. The most
productive outcome of such efforts would be to have the entire Northern Neck
designated as a groundwater management area.
� Water Conservation: The County should require installation of low flow toilets and
faucets prior to the issuance of a building permit.
� DRASTIC: DRASTIC is a mapping system designed to evaluate the groundwater
contamination potential of an area. The County should incorporate this source of
information into their planning process.
* Priority Water Bodies: Efforts to improve and/or maintain surface water quality in the
County, should focus on its three priority water bodies: Carter Creek, the
Rappahannock River, and Indian Creek.

GROUNDWATER
* The County should require a certificate of septic tank inspection and pump out be
submitted every four or five years with local tax payments. The inspection could be
conducted by the person who pumps the tank or by the local sanitation officer.
a An 18 inch minimum separation should be maintained between septic systems and the
water table.
� Tap fees should be required as a method of monitoring the number of wells dug each
year. The revenue could provide funds for a wellhead protection program.
* The minimum distance between edges of septic system tile fields and water bodies
should be 100 feet.

*All abandoned wefls in the County should be capped.

SURFACE WATER
* The County should acquire at least one impoundment site for future drinking water
supply.3
* Impervious surfaces should be limited to 20% of the lot area which is suitable for
development.
Stormwater best management practices should be incorporated Into the planning andI
subdivision review process.

SOILSI
� The County should direct development away from soils which have a high water table,
percolate rapidly or are highly erodible.3
� A soil scientist should be contracted, on a consulting basis, to evaluate soil suitability
and site plans.
� The County should determine the applicability and feasibility of compiling a geographic
or resource information system which details the soil characteristics of the County
(GIS or RIS).

WETLANDSI
� The County should commnission a Virginia Natural Heritage Inventory of rare and
endangered species.I
* All projects involving wetlands impacts should have a pre-and post-construction site
visit.I
* The Wetlands Board should work closely with the County legal staff to ensure'
enforcement of and compliance with the Wetlands Ordinance.
� The County should eliminate permitting that takes place after wetlands have been
altered. This should be pursued through cooperating with the County Legal Staff.
� The County should establish a fund for contributions from individuals who destroy a
tidal or non tidal wetland. The money should be used to acquire the most ecologicallyI
valuable wetland areas in the County.
� The County should work closely with the Virginia Institute of Marine Science to
determine sections of the County's waterways where "No Wake" zones should beI

SHELLFISH
* State regulations requiring sewage holding pump-out facilities at marina's should be
rigorously enforced.i
* The County should establish a shellfish grounds restoration and preservation program
funded through a marina user fee.

COASTAL FLOOD HAZARDS
9 High hazard areas should be zoned for the lowest rural density.
* Capital facilities and infrastructure should be sited out of flood prone areas.

iff

*Land uses in the flood hazard zone should be limited to those that are water
I ~ ~~dependent.

SHORELINE EROSION
*View corridors should require the retention of 80% of existing vegetation should be
required within a 100 foot waterfront buffer.
I * ~~A setback for shoreline structures equal to or greater than thirty times the average
historical rate of erosion should be required.
T he construction or repair of shore-hardening devices on residential property
I ~~~should be prohibited. The County should encourage the use of vegetation for
shoreline stabilization.

I ~~PUBLIC ACCESS
� The County should compile an outdoor recreation plan in which future public
facilities are ranked and mapped. Land ownership, site suitability, and acquisition
addevelopment costs should be analyzed.
� Public access facilities should be developed at the Greenvale Landing on Route 662
and the ramp and dock at Windmffl Point.
* Additional staff should be added to acquire and manage outdoor recreation facilities
and public access points.

ZONING
* Density Bonus: The Board of Supervisors should have the option to permit an
increase inthe number of dwelling units allowed by granting a density bonus if they
find that Increased density will not impair the character of the area and will be in
the best interests of the general public. Suggestions for conditions which might
warrant a density bonus are Included in this report.
� Purnose: The purpose section of the zoning ordinance should be amended to
incorporate environmental considerations and protection of water quality of the
Chesapeake Bay. For example, page 1 (6) undue density considerations, should
I ~ ~~include environmental quality degradation. Other amendments could be
considered as a purpose: To protect the health~safety and welfare of current and
future generations of County residents located along Lancaster's shoreline-, To
prevent degradation and promote the sustainable use of the following resources:
surface water, ground water, tidal and non-tidal wetlands, highly productive
agricultural and forestal soils, shellflsh, finfish and the Chesapeake Bay, and/or To
preserve rare or unique flora and fauna found in the County and to preserve their
* ~~~respective habitat.
*Cluster Subdivisions: The County should encourage the clustering of single f~amily
housing when such developments: maintain average lot density, preserve the
environmental integrity of the site, are consistent with the comprehensive plan,
and complement the established character of the area.

SUBDIVISION
a Site Analysis: Pre and post-development site analysis should consist of the review
criteria set forth in this report.
I ~ ~* Imnervious Surfaces: Impervious surfaces should be documented as a percentage of
the buildable lot and in total square feet.

I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~iv

* Section 5-2: The Subdivision Conumiittee should require the subdivider to provide
profiles of soil characteristics. In addition to requirements for percolation rates (as
required by section 5-2), information regarding the presence of shrink swell soils
and water table levels should be submitted.
a Section 5-7: The location and characteristics of soils should be analyzed together
and not be considered mutually exclusive (as currently set forth in section 5-7 of
the subdivision ordinance).

EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
� The County should increase fees for Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plans andI
contract with a soil scientist to review those plans.
* The submission of a vegetation protection plan (or soil conservation plan) should be
required prior to issuance of a building permit. Such a plan should call for theI
protection of all trees in excess of 6 inches in diameter. Their protection should
extend to the area encompassed by their canopy.

� A section for recommended/required practices should be inserted in the ordinance.
Requirements should include: specific buffer zone requirements, an outline of
expected natural drainage patterns should be utilized to the fullest extent possible,
impervious surfaces should be minimized at all stages of construction (i.e. gravel
access roads). and regulations limiting and controlling exposed soils should beI

� A provision should be added in the ordinance explaining clean-up requirements. All
applicants should be required to submit clean-up plans. A performance bond shouldI
be required. Violation should result in a sizeable fine ($1,000/day), which could
fund immediate County clean-up of the site and offset the cost of monitoring and
enforcement.3

LAND MANAGEMENT AREA ]DESIGNATION
We recommend designating Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas, as required
by the Preservation Act, establishing a Conservation District which would serve as a
shoreline overlay extending 1500 feet from the water, and establishment of a
Management District with the 50 foot contour being its boundary. At a minimum, the
Chesapeake Bay Criteria should be adopted as delineating a Preservation Area and theI
50 foot contour should serve as the basis for a management area.

Report

1. INTRODUCTION

I ~~Back~ground

The shoreline of Lancaster County is a valuable resource both in terms of

economic and environmental considerations. The shoreline development experienced

by the County provides revenue directly in the form of property taxes and Indirectly

through sales tax receipts. Additionally, the shoreline plays an Important role in the

I ~~~quality of water which is related to the economic vitality of marine based industries. The

3 ~~reader is reminded of the study compiled last year, Lancaster County Shoreline

Management Study Preliminary Results. and encouraged to use this as a source of

detailed resource analysis. The following report summarizes pertinent Information,

analyzes important resources, and presents management strategies and options to

I ~~protect and enhance the environment of the County in order to further the development

oriented economy of Lancaster. This plan, including policy recommendations and

implementation strategies, is offered to the County for final revision and approval.

Growth and Po-Dulation

Lancaster County is experiencing a moderate growth rate. However, its

I ~~traditionally rural low density pattern of development leads to impacts which are

proportionately more significant. While the current population of Lancaster County is

small, an estimated population of 11,520 persons by 1990, land development is

occurring at a rapid pace. Between 1984 and 1989, Lancaster County has experienced a

1,800% increase in acres subdivided and a 400% increase in the number of lots

I ~~~recorded. However, less than one fourth of the platted lots have been built out.1I This

situation presents Lancaster with many challenges as it attempts to manage growth in a

manner which is sustainable in the long term.

1"Land Rush: Bay preservation act stirs waterfront building boom," Cyril T. Zaneski,
pp. Al, A3. April, 1989 Virginian Pilot (Norfolk, Virginia).

Economic Imnlications of Resource Management

The natural environment and rural character of the County are the primary

reasons many people visit the area. The Virginia Division of Tourism showed an increase

of 6.7 % over 1986 total travel expenditures in the County to a level of $39,603,000 in

1987. Lancaster County is the largest recipient of travel expenditures in the Northern

Neck Region.2

Many citizens have chosen to live in Lancaster County because of the quality of the

environment. Residential development contributes significantly to the tax base of the

County. In the third quarter of 1988, Lancaster County issued 45 new permits for

housing construction valued at approximately $3.2 million. The average value of newly

authorized housing units in the region was highest in Lancaster County with an average

value of $71,111.

However, locating residential development in sensitive environmental areas is a

short sighted perspective which has significant economic, social and environmental

consequences for the future well being of the County. Whether those who live in the

County are permanent or seasonal residents, the effect they have on land development

patterns is often irreversible and may accelerate environmental degradation.

There are substantial demands placed on a locality due to single family homes and

larger developments. These demands result in increasing expenditures for education,

public access to the shoreline, recreational needs, and environmental considerations.

Environmental impacts resulting from development include increased use of

groundwater, higher stormwater runoff rates, increased traffic, increased sewage,

impaired views, and a decrease in water quality. The resource based amenities, and

subsequent economic benefits, will be lost if development causes excessive

environmental degradation, or if detached single family residential development is

allowed to the exclusion of all other uses.

2 Center for Public Service, University of Virginia.

Indigenous economic concerns such as the seafood industry, locally owned retail

businesses (essential for capitalizing on tourism driven consumer demands), and

potential wholesale businesses associated with seafood products are also an integral

component of the character of Lancaster County's shoreline area. The County will suffer

if social and emotional issues dominate land use planning considerations at the expense

of innovative long term policy, planning, and development initiatives.

Develoument Trends

Residential development on or near the shoreline is the primary form of land

conversion In the County. While construction activity in the County is increasing, only

23% to 30% of approved subdivision plats have been built on. Thus, the County has

experienced only a small portion of the potential impact of shoreline development.

Traditionally, large subdivisions have been heavily regulated and subjected to an

intense level of scrutiny. While comprehensive and careful review of such projects is

necessary, such developments have the potential to use investment capital to produce a

proposal which is environmentally sound and would contribute more to the long term

local economic health of the County than would traditional single lot developments. The

County must be aware of the opportunity which cluster developments offer to enhance

the values of property inland from the shoreline. If done properly, such development

can greatly increase the long term economic viability and environmental integrity of the

County. Whether or not a planned development represents such an opportunity should

be based on objective environmental criteria, sound planning principles (such as future

community facilities needs) and a uniform review process.

While major shoreline subdivisions are open to intense public scrutiny, minor

subdivisions have been viewed as an exercise of rights inherent in private property to

develop or improve land. This view has resulted in far less attention paid to their

environmental impacts. Minor subdivisions represented 42% of the lots subdivided in

the County and are primarily located on the waterfront. Therefore, while small

development may have a minimal environmental impact, the cumulative impact of this

type of development must receive attention. While attention may take the form of a

regulation, such a regulation does not prohibit development. Regulation can take many

forms, including information disclosure requirements. These could require someoneI

who is developing a parcel of land to record certain details of the development with the

County. Such a requirement would not represent an. excessive burden since the

information required could be that which a person would need to have in order to

develop the site. When viewed in this way. such a "regulation" amounts to finformnation

sharing. This type of procedure would provide the County with information which isI

necessary to conduct development review and administration.

Specific information regarding setbacks, percentage of impervious surfaces, and

open space for residential developments should accompany subdivision applications.

The absence of this information inhibits the County 's ability to adequately consider the

impacts (or lack thereof) of specific developments and design practices.I

13. RESOURCE ANALYSISI

A. WATER

High water quality is indispensable to human, plant and animal well-being, as well

as to the economic health of Lancaster County. Shoreline development will impact waterI

quality through numerous and complex processes. The flow of water, both surface runoff

and groundwater movement, transmits pollutants which are introduced in the coastal

regions.

Events typically associated with development activities such as the removal of

vegetation, disturbance of soils, and alteration of natural drainage patterns result inI

decreased infiltration of rainwater and increased runoff, leading to increased pollution

loading of surface water bodies. These pollutants- including sediments, nutrients,

pathogens, thermal pollution, toxic materials, and oxygen demanding wastes (BOD),

result in a decrease in the water quality. Threats to human health from contaminated

waters and marine life are also increased. Not only are species numbers and diversityI

lost but production of economic species decreases with the associated loss of revenue for

the area. Finally, the water quality degradation decreases recreational potential and

shoreline aesthetics, both essential for the continued economic development through

the attraction of tourism and new residents.

I ~~~~The removal of vegetation reduces~ infiltration and Increases the rate of surface

runoff in several ways. First, the loss of vegetation decreases the utilization of moisture

in the soil by plants, thus decreasing the time It takes the soil to become saturated. At

the same time, an increased amount of rainwater reaches the ground quicker and begins

to pool faster. If the area has any slope, the water will begin to move downhill. The

I ~~removal of vegetative cover increases the rate of surface flow by minimizing surface

resistance and friction. Faster surface runoff increases the erosive capacity of the runoff,

while decreasing the chance for water to infiltrate into the ground. Any increase in

impervious surfaces decreases the potential of infiltration of water to groundwater, and

results in rapid '"sheetflow" across these surfaces, increasing the rate and quantity of

I ~~~surface runoff.

Disruption of the soil and alterations to natural drainage paths during

construction effect water quality. The use of heavy equipment in construction tends to

compact the soil, decreasing the ability of water to infiltrate or percolate through it.

This results in faster saturation of the soil, leading to decreased infiltration, less

I ~~recharge of groundwater aquifers and increased surface runoff. Therefore, construction

3 ~~activities effect both surface and groundwater quantity and quality. Special consideration

should be given to development activities in the near shore environment.

A.1. Groundwater

I ~~~~~~Groundwater is an important resource to Lancaster County because (,f its

economic value for residential and commercial consumption as well as its relation to

surface water quality. Currently, Lancaster County is totally dependent on groundwater

3 ~~as the source of their water supply. Because deep wells are expensive to drill, many

I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5

residents of Lancaster County have relied on shallow wells into the surface aquifer. if theU

surface aquifer become polluted, many residents will not be able to afford to replace

shallow wells with deeper wells. If groundwater becomes scarce or contaminated, newI

development will be impossible without an alternative water supply, such as surface

impoundments.

In 1976. total withdrawals from the Northern Neck were 2 million gallons per

day (gpd) with use split evenly between domestic and industrial consumption. The

coastal plain is underlain by 8-9 potable aquifers. The top aquifer is the unconfinedI

surface aquifer is relatively shallow with wells dug or bored 6-80 feet deep. Wells in this

aquifer are only suitable for single family residential and light farmn uses, but they

comprise most of the private wells in Lancaster County. Seasonal fluctuations and lack

of sufficient storage make this aquifer an impractical water source except for smaller

supplies.I

Groundwater from the surface aquifer maintains base stream flows between

periods of rainfall. The surface aquifer is recharged directly from rainfall infiltrating

down through the soil. By feeding springs and seeps. the surface aquifer contributes3

significant quantities of fresh water to streams and rivers. Therefore, a decline in

groundwater quality due to pollution is reflected in a decline in stream water quality. AI

drop in the water table results in lower stream flows and consequently less dilution and

flushing of silt and pollutants from the streams, rivers, and estuaries. The surface

aquifer is more important to the residents living in Eastern Lancaster County, where the3

upper and principal aquifers are commonly quite brackish and unsuitable for potable use.

This aquifer is usually potable except for some wells adjacent to brackish surface waterI

bodies.

The two confined aquifers, upper artesian and principal artesian aquifer, are

widely depended upon as the primrnay source of groundwater for much of the larger3

water users in the region. The upper artesian aquifer, 60 feet thick and 200-375 feet

deep, has moderate well yields of 20-40 gallons per minute (gpm). This aquifer is aI

reliable source of water for individual homes, farms, and possibly for subdivisions and

light to moderate water users.

The principal artesian aquifer, located at a depth of 500-600 feet, produces water

ranging from 40-500 gpm. with several wells in Lancaster County pumping in excess of I

I ~~~million gallons per day (gpd). This is a large reservoir of excellent quality water which is

tapped by most of the major water users such as community wells, public water systems,

and industrial users. A 1977 groundwater study indicated that 88% of the total

groundwater withdrawn in the Northern Neck is from the principal aquifer. The depth

to water makes it costly to tap so it is not widely used for domestic supplies.

I ~~~~Groundwater extraction faster than the rate of natural recharge is called water

table drawdown and can cause two problems. First, the water level in the aquifer will

lower causing some wells and possibly springs to dry up. A decline of over 23 feet has

occurred in the principal aquifer since the wells have been monitored. This decline

appears to be accelerating In recent years and is regional due to heavy pumping in areas

U ~~such as West Point, and the Southeast portion of the State (Virginia Beach, Norfolk,

etc ... ). 3 Groundwater flow within aquifers has changed significantly from natural

patterns. Groundwater now flows directly toward areas which have high pumpage rates,

such as West Point and Franklin. Second, saltwater can intrude into the freshwater

aquifer. Saltwater intrusion can make groundwater unpalatable, unhealthy. or completely

I ~~unusable. The use of groundwater faster than the recharges rate without developing an

alternative water source, places limits on future construction and development.

An additional development impact on groundwater quality is the increase in the

number of septic systems in place. More than 85% of Lancaster residents rely on septic

tanks for sewage disposal. However, th ere are many resource based constraints on their

I ~~use. In Lancaster County, 17% of the land (16,622 acres) has water tables that are

seasonally too high for proper septic system functioning. An additional 25% of the land

H 3C~~onversation with Virginia Water Control Board Staff. 1989.

* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7

(25.485 acres) has soil which is too sandy and has a prohibitively high percolation rate to3

allow for proper treatment of septic effluent.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reports that septic systemsI

represent the largest reported cause of groundwater contamination resulting in disease3

outbreaks In the United States. Surface ponding of septic tank leachates was also

identified as a sanitary nuisance and potential health hazard. A study conducted by the

North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development

recommended septic tank densities for watersheds with a high proportion of unsuitableI

soils and they concluded that septic tank densities of approximately I septic tank system

per 7 acres are necessary in watersheds adjacent to shellfish habitat to prevent the

closure of shellfish beds.43

Thus, water quality and quantity for ground and surface water is an important

concern to Lancaster County. The quality of water affects not only the health of CountyI

residents but, in many cases. their livelihood as well. The quality of potable water places

limitations on growth which severely constrains a development oriented economy.

Lancaster County can take an active role in protecting water resources by regulating land

uses, encouraging Best Management Practices and guiding development activities.

A. 2. Surface WaterI

Surface waters in Lancaster County are a valued resource not only as a needed

source of potable water but also opportunity for recreation and habitat for aquatic life.

The two types of pollution are point and nonpoint source pollution. Surface water quality3

degradation is primarily the result of nonpoint source pollution. The runoff of nutrients

from agricultural and silvicultural activities (fertilizers, pesticides and animal wastes) asI

well as sediment erosion associated with these activities contribute to nonpoint source3

pollution. Furthermore, as shoreline development increases, nonpoint source pollution

will increase. Pollution increases associated with construction activities must be3

4 Division of Environmental Management, Water Quality Planning Branch, "The Impact of
Septic Tanks on Shellfish Waters, unpublished manuscript, North CarolinaI
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, February, 1982.

8 I

minimized before degrading current water quality. The subsequent increasing demand

for recreational boating facilities will also generate nonpoint source pollution. The

primary point source contributors to water quality degradation are seafood processing

plants, marinas, and sewage treatment effluent.

The intense development on the shoreline, and the subsequent level of water use,

is the rationale for addressing the issue of water supply. Utilizing impoundments as a

source of a public water supply is an important issue for Lancaster County to consider

because of the limited supply of quality groundwater and the inability of the County (due

to geological factors noted elsewhere) to insure an adequate supply of groundwater. The

findings presented in the Water Qualitv Management Plan, produced by the Northern

Neck Planning District Commission (NNPDC) [19731, offer the only available information

on potential impoundment sites. The policy of acquiring impoundment sites has been

considered previously by citizens and officials in Lancaster County. 5 The County is urged

to reconsider this option in light of increasing concerns regarding groundwater supplies

and continued violations of drinking water standards in the southeastern portion of the

County.6

The following criteria used to determine desirable locations for future reservoirs

are applicable to any decision which may be reached by the County:

1. The nearness of reservoirs to potential population centers.
2. The expense of constructing the initial reservoirs.
3. Flood control and cost of spillways to carry floodwaters.7
4. Affect of impoundment on wetlands.

The study emphasized the desirability of developing a series of small reservoirs located

in the headwater of streams. The justification for such a policy in Lancaster County can

be based on the fact that: a) these locations have less population near their headwaters

which minimizes the probability of sewage entering the reservoirs through septic

Interview with local residents, 2/89.
6Lancaster County Draft Shoreline Element to the Comprehensive Plan
7 Water Quality Management Plan. Planning District-17, Northern Neck Planning District
Commission 1973. Deward M. Martin & Associates, Williamsburg, Virginia, p. 1-17.

leachate, and, b) reservoirs located upstream can be utilized to release water to help

maintain low flows in downstream reaches, thereby improving the aesthetic,

recreational, and habitat values of the stream.8I

The major recommendation for Lancaster County calls for a group of reservoirs on

the two branches of the Corrotoman River with a plant located near New Lancaster on

Route 600. This plant would be used in conjunction with several smaller reservoirs on3

Brown Creek, Camp Mill Pond and Mill Creek to provide water supply to the

southeastern part of Lancaster County.9 "Criteria used in the initial design of desirableI

reservoirs included area and volume relationships, length and size of the structure of the

dam, proximity to future population centers, downstream uses of impounded water, cost

of land, obstructions such as roads and buildings, and possible eligibility for Federal3

Akid."1Io

The recommendations presented in the aforementioned study must be carefullyI

reviewed in light of changes in circumstances since it was conducted in 1973. A review

of sites which were proposed in the 1973 study should be under-taken to provide

updated information regarding the status of the water flow, changes in land ownership3

and particularly development patterns. Specifically, the Eastern Branch of the

Corrotoman alternative should be reviewed in light of changes over the last 16 years.I

However, the recommendation in the study for the provision of a water supply source for

the southeastern portion of the County (which is currently not capable of providing its

residents with safe drinking water) is still relevant. While the creation of impoundments3

has become increasingly regulated, this water supply option must be pursued. The

potential impacts of impoundments on stream flows, wetlands, wildlife and recreationalI

uses must be considered in location and design of future impoundments (i.e. recent3

Virginia legislation on minimum in-stream flow). hiowever, the inability of Lancaster

8 Ibid.
9 Ibid. p. 1-18.I
10 Ibid. P. 1-19.
1 0

County to control uses of groundwater within and outside its political boundaries

emphasizes the need to pursue other options for water supply.

II. B. WETLANDS

Definition

Wetlands, an ecologically significant resource, are found along the coastal area in

Lancaster County. There are two types of wetlands, tidal and non-tidal. While there are

several slightly different definition and classification schemes for wetlands., the

definition of wetlands used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is considered the most

comprehensive and is adopted by wetlands scientists. The definition is as follows:

Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic
systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or
the land is covered by shallow water. ... Wetlands must have one or
more of the following three attributes: 1. at least periodically, the
land supports predominantly hydrophytes, 2. the substrate is
predominantly undrained hydric soil, or 3. the substrate is nonsoil
and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some
time during the growing season of each year. I I

Tidal wetlands are subdivided into saline and freshwater, while non-tidal are only

freshwater. All these types of wetlands consist of the following vegetation types:

Submerged aquatic vegetation; non-vegetated; emergent; scrub-shrub, and forested.

However, the specific vegetation species, salinity of the water, and soil type ratios

provide a means for specifying among the various sub-categories. 12

Importance of Wetlands

Wetlands play a significant role in maintaining environmental quality. They

provide a buffer against flooding, sedimentation and shoreline erosion. Other significant

water quality benefits include providing a site for groundwater recharge and infiltration.

In addition, this resource presents an important habitat and refuge for many species of

fish and wildlife. Studies have found that 2/3 of all commercial fish depend on wetlands

11 Wetlands, James G Gosselink and William J. Mitsch, (Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New
York), 1976. p. 18.
12 Conserving our Wetland Resources: Avenues for Citizen Participation An Action Handbook.
Chesapeake Bay Foundation, p. 6.

in the early stages of life. Other significant uses Include recreational, scientific research

and educational. 13

The total impact of wetland losses upon water quality, wildlife and surroundingU

environments has not been ascertained. By the mid 1970s', 54% of all wetlands, on a

national scale, had been destroyed and converted to other uses. Activities such as

drainage, stream channelization, filling and dredging, and impoundments have had a3

detrimental affect on wetlands.

II. C. SHELLFISH

Consideration of impacts on shellfish producing areas should remain a priority inI

making land use decisions in Lancaster County. The resource represents a significant3

contribution to the economy of the area and should be fostered through proper

management and protection. Several programs are already underway to remedy existing

problems.

Long term planning should include consideration of a more extensive network ofI

public sewer and water systems to accommodate the increase in residential population.3

Improvements in pollution control technology and monitoring of treatment also make

central sewage facilities easier to control.3

II. D. FLOOD HAZARDSI

Lancaster County is vulnerable to flooding from rivers and storm surges associated3

with large coastal storms. In recognition of the catastrophic loss of life and property

which could result from these events, the undertaking of proper planning and3

precaution is necessary. Flooding results in the loss of life and the destruction of

property. Furthermore, flooding contributes to deterioration of the water quality ~.n theI

Chesapeake Bay by adding tremendous sediment loads and by transporting untreated3

runoff. The destruction of wetlands, runoff from impervious surfaces, and the loss of

13 Ibid. pp. 7-8.

1 23

natural vegetated buffers increase the potential for flooding and the corresponding

dangers.

As construction pressures continue for the development of the shoreline, the

hazards associated with coastal flooding will escalate. In addition, localities will be forced

to carry more of the burden for disaster assistance as the Federal Emergency

Management Agency is paying for fewer costs associated with assistance programs. 14 As

a result, Lancaster County should enforce strict rules governing development and

construction in flood prone areas. Therefore, the shoreline management plan should

address the hazards associated with flooding, both in terms of riverine flooding as well as

coastal flooding resulting from storm surges and rising sea level.

Riverine Hazards

A flood occurs when a stream or river overflows its channel and spreads onto the

floodplain. Most streams flood every several years. Larger rivers have a well developed

floodplain and are frequently associated with wetlands. Floods, of different sizes and

magnitudes, occur every year and are only dangerous when development occurs in the

floodway. The magnitude of such events will continue to change as watersheds become

more urbanized and runoff increases. In some cases, the 100 year floodplain is

expanding as a result of higher rates of runoff. Therefore, the floodplain boundary should

be expanded as circumstances dictate.

Coastal Hazards

Coastal flooding could result from a storm surge associated with hurricanes,

tropical storms, "northeasters", or other large storms. According to National Flood

Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), the 100 year flood level is the basic designation used for

flood hazards planning, which would result in flooding of areas at or below an elevation of

7 1/2 feet. This includes the Eastern half of Fleets Bay Neck, Fleets Island, Foxwells, the

last part of Route 626 on Towles Point and Clark Point, the southwest peninsula along

the Rappahannock and Corrotoman Rivers, Belle Isle and Morrattico. Under extreme

14Accomack County Coastal Plan, p. 35.
13

conditions, flooding could be as widespread as all of Windmill Point Peninsula east of

Harpers Creek, Fleets Bay Neck and Poplar Neck.

II. E. PUBLIC ACCESS

Current public access to recreational opportunities in the County is inadequate to

meet the present needs of County residents. As shoreline build-out occurs, traditional

points of access will be eliminated. Furthermore, if the County is to expand recreational

opportunities, additional sites must be acquired, developed and managed. Only by such

actions, can the County expect to expand the economic benefits of its vast shoreline to

inland parcels of land. Furthermore, the longer the County avoids such actions, the less

land it will be able to purchase with its limited financial resources.

There are two public access points in Lancaster County. one is located at

Greenvale Landing on Route 662. A 1985 Virginia Marine Resources Commission survey

indicated that while the condition of the docking structure was generally good, the site

was not well maintained and was used predominantly by commercial fishermen. 15 The

site is surrounded by open woods and is easily accessible. However, the parking area

needs to be graded and enlarged if it is to be promoted as a public launching site. The

Virginia Boating Access Study indicates the presence of a ramp and dock at Windmill

Point owned by the State Highway Department. Information available suggests that the

ramp needs repairs before it can become usable for boats on trailers. 16 The County

should examine these two sites and consider them for improvement and development.

Included with this study are two documents from the Virginia Outdoor Fund. The Fund

provides grants-in aid and loans from a revolving loan fund to municipalities to use in

financing community wide recreational needs. Criteria for receiving the funds as well as

instructions and applications are included with this materials.

15 Master ListinI of the LandinL Sites and Public Landing Survey Rer)ort, Virginia Marine
Resources Commission, February, 1985, Sheet 5.
16Tidewater Virginia Boating Access Inventory, Division for Planning and Recreation Resources,
Virginia Department of Conservation and Historic Resources.
14

In order to meet outdoor recreational demands, the County should hire additional

full-time planning staff to address the need for public facilities. The staff person would

U ~~~serve several functions which are essential to the implementation and attainment of the

outdoor recreational needs. These would include serving as a contact person for multi-

I ~~~county efforts at providing regional recreational opportunities, formulating a

3 ~~~comprehensive outdoor recreational facility siting priorities list, functioning as a contact

for landowners, community outreach and education, and functioning as a land

acquisition, management, and enforcement officer, and grantsperson. Frequently, funds

for grant administration are available through land acquisition loans or grants. The

I ~~~utilization of such funds could contribute to the feasibility of funding this position.

3 ~~~~There is a significant need for additional public access and outdoor recreational

opportunities In Lancaster County. Information identifying current sites indicates that

3 ~~~even those sites currently owned by the County are not properly developed to provide for

public recreational activities. There are federal and state programs which offer financial

I ~~~assistance to provide these opportunities which should be utilized. Failure on the part of

the County to address these needs will result in a short term development centered

exclusively along the shoreline. By implementing some of the policies recommended in

3 ~~~this report, the County will increase the value of its inland lots, thereby contributing to

the long term economic growth of Lancaster County.

3 III11. WATER MANAGEMENT OPTIONS

A. INTRODUCTION

3 ~~~~The following discussion of water management options will reflect the

management level which the County plans to address. Water management efforts must

I ~~~address surface water. A surface water policy could be based on their designation as

3 ~~priority water bodies. In combination with surface water, groundwater must also be

managed. Several options exist for managing this resource. One management option is

3 ~~to request groundwater management area designation. Through such actions, the County

*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 15

would be recognizing the interjurlsdictional nature of the resource and the need to3

initiate an appropriate management approach. However, the pursuit of such a

designation will be politically difficult and time consuming. A more direct managementI

policy would be to utilize the DRASTIC Information currently being assembled by the3

Northern Neck Planning District Commission (NNPDC) and the VirGIS laboratory at

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. The NNPDC and VirGIS are currently

beginning this one year project and the completion date is projected as April, 1990.

This planning tool will certainly have management implications for the coastal zone ofI

the County. A fourth option is to focus on the individual level through the adoption of3

water conservation measures. While such measures may be viewed as an inconvenience.

their broad application will facilitate a more equitable use of water resources and a3

decrease of wastewater production.

Due to the interrelated nature of groundwater and surface water, policies whichI

improve the quality and/or quantity of groundwater will have a corresponding beneficial3

impact on surface water. The following discussion begins by describing a surface water

management option based on priority water bodies. An analysis of groundwater3

management designation Is included with recommendations. A groundwater program

assessment project is described to provide County officials and residents with aU

background regarding its applicability and programmatic details. Finally, water3

conservation measures are examined in light of their costs and benefits. Regardless of

other options, water conservation measures should be adopted.5

B. PRIORITY WATER BODIESI

Lancaster County has three "priority water bodies": Carter Creek, the3

Rappahanmiock River, and Indian Creek.
The term 'priority water bodies' is a management concept
originated by the Environmental Protection Agency to e cuaestates to
focus resources and control activities in areas where water quality
decisions are needed. .. .Priority water bodies are those waters

1 63

experiencing significant water quality problems, that pose an unreasonable
risk to human health, and evidence substantial use Impairment. 17

Water body rankings were calculated based on a three row, three column matrix

U ~~~scoring system. The three rows correspond to uses which require a high level of water

quality: public water supply, aquatic life, and primary contact recreation. By protecting

these high level uses many other uses requiring less stringent water quality are

protected. The three columns used in the calculations are: degree of impairment,

ability to control problem, and resource value Importance. 18 While this classification

I ~~~may not satisfyt all concerned parties, it does provide an objective basis upon which

County programs can be organized by priorities. In light of the river classifications,

efforts to improve and/or maintain surface water quality in the County, should focus on

* ~~~the three priority water bodies.

Available information on Carter and Indian Creeks indicates the local sewage

I ~~~treatment plant discharges, marinas, recreational boating activity and urban and

agricultural runoff are the primary reasons for their inclusion as priority waterbodies.

Recommended corrective measures include the development of Best management

practices or soil and erosion conservation programs to limit both agricultural and urban

nonpoint source runoff. A recommendation that two wastewater treatment plants and

I ~~~collection systems for the Carter Creek basin be built was rejected by local

* ~~~municipalities.

The problems identified as impacting the main stem of the Rappahannock

U ~~~include: elevated fecal coliform bacteria, point source discharges, marina activity, septic

tank failures, urban and agricultural runoff and related nutrient enrichment. Many of the

I ~~~concerns listed above are addressed by the Chesapeake Bay initiatives. However, the

I ~~~need for more stringent enforcement of boat pollution and marina pump out facilities is

not required in the Bay Act, and should be pursued by the County. Furthermore, all

17 Priority Water Bodies Information Bulletin 576, produced by the Virginia Water Control Board
(October 1988), p.1.
18ibid. p. 3.
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 17

three of Lancaster County's priority waterbodies were recommended for inclusion in the

Governor's "Shoreline Sanitation Residential Program."

A final consideration should include a close examination of the quality of the

waters within the Corrotoman River. Information from a monitoring station located 3

miles up from the mouth of the river indicates that the water regularly is hypoxic

(lacking sufficient oxygen) during the summer months. 19 Increased development along

the Corrotoman shoreline will contribute to the further decline in water quality. The

implementation and enforcement of new regulatory measures will be needed to

minimize (and possibly prevent) excessive degradation of the Corrotoman.

C. GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREA DESIGNATION

Groundwater Management Areas are established and designated by the State

Water Control Board (SWCB). State statutory provisions allow a locality to petition the

Board to establish a Groundwater Management Area. The minimum size for designation

is a County. Within a designated management area the SWCB issues a permit to install or

expand groundwater use which is equal to/or exceeds 30,000 gallons per month.

Agricultural withdrawals are exempt from permit requirements. Therefore, we

recommend that the County pursue additional steps to monitor groundwater withdrawals

by agricultural users.

Conversations with the SWCB staff lead us to recommend that Lancaster not

pursue designation of the County as a groundwater management area. As currently

enforced, such an action would encumber the County with state regulations while

Lancaster would not receive any appreciable benefits. Although detailed groundwater

management recommendations are provided in Section IV of this report, a few will be

mentioned at this point to support this recommendation. First, recent modeling

conducted by the SWCB has generated substantial data which illustrates that not only are

groundwater withdrawals from West Point affecting Lancaster County, but so are the

19 Tributary Water Qualitv Characterization Report. Virginia Marine Resources Commission, 1985.

areas in the Southeastern Groundwater Management Area (i.e. Virginia Beach, Norfolk,

Hampton Roads etc ... ). These results illustrate the need for a coordinated groundwater

management effort which would encompass the entire coastal plain.

Therefore, an appropriate long term policy for the County to pursue is to work

I ~~with other jurisdictions in the Northern Neck and the Middle Peninsula to develop an

awareness of the Interfurisdictlonal nature of groundwater management. The most

productive outcome of such efforts (for the County and all participating localities) would

3 ~~be to have the entire Northern Neck designated as a groundwater management area.

Such an action would greatly facilitate the process of incorporating all coastal plain

I ~~jurisdictions into a comprehensive groundwater management area. Such a

3 ~~comprehensive management area would represent an opportunity for all participating

localities to have their needs considered in the allocation of this resource.

D. DRASTIC

I ~~~~DRASTIC is an acronym that describes the factors used in a mapping system

I ~~designed to evaluate the groundwater potential of an area. The parameters included in

the DRASTIC system are (D) Depth to water, (R) Recharge [precipitation], (A) Aquifer

3 ~~~media, (5) Soil media, (T) Topography, (I) Impact of the vadose zone, (C) Conductivity of

the Aquifer. Information is gathered on these components and a numerical DRASTIC

I ~~~index is calculated. These indices can be mapped to show relative differences in

3 ~~~pollution potential for groundwater in an area. DRASTIC is designed to be used as a

planning or screening tool. In general, DRASTIC and associated maps cannot be used in

3 ~~~site-specific evaluations because of local complexities in geological conditions and the

scale at which they are produced. Typically, DRASTIC maps have a margin of error of

U ~~plus or minus 100 acres. Some areas of the country have implemented modified

3 ~~DRASTIC groundwater protection on a site specific level which utilizes a much larger

base scale and much more detailed input data.

Most localities are using DRASTIC as a screening tool for general site suitability

and as an informational resource in making planning and zoning decisions. DRASTIC is

used as a screening tool for siting facilities such as landfills, schools and roads as part ofU

a general point rating system. If an area exceeds a certain number of points, then more5

stringent siting criteria/research/evidence of appropriateness are required before the

site is approved. DRASTIC also has the potential to be used as a tool in determining3

target areas for code enforcement and designating groundwater protection areas. Some

localities have overlayed the zoning map on protection areas and found the need to baseI

certain uses and Intensities on the DRASTIC site index. Such a situation highlights the

need to integrate this type of information into the comprehensive land use planning

process.3

The Northern Neck Planning District Comnmission Is currently incorporating

DRASTIC mapping with the Virginia Geographic Information System (VirGIS). TheI

County should support these efforts and utilize this source of Information by3

incorporating relevant data into their planning process.

E. WATER CONSERVATION

Estimates show that using low-flow toilets, shower heads, kitchen faucets,

lavatory faucets and urinals results in a reduction of indoor water consumption by at least3

25%. While a low-flow toilet would cost $25 to $75 more than current models, sales

literature for low-water toilets promise savings of $25 to $100 on water and sewer bills.5

Currently, at least fourteen plumbing manufacturers have added a low-flow model to

their product lines and three more are gearing up to introduce their first water-savingI

products into the market. The City of Frederick changed its residential building code3

six months ago to require low-flush toilets as one of the few alternatives it had to allow

for expansion and growth.203

20 "Water-Saving Standards Debated," H. ~Jane Lehman, Washingiton Post, March 18, 1989. pp. Fl.I
Fl10.
201

3 l~~V. IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS

A. INTRODUCTION

3 ~~~~Because it is located in Tidewater Virginia, Lancaster County is required to

comply with the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. The Criteria which are being

I ~~~promulgated require localities in the Tidewater region to incorporate specific

3 ~~environmental protection measures into their planning process. In some instances, the

requirements have the effect of clearly stating the ability of localities to protect water

3 ~~~quality through land use regulations. Therefore, the Criteria and the Act itself can be

viewed as increasing the ability of local governments to protect their resource base.

I ~~~~The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act Criteria calls for a two-year plan of

3 ~~implementation. The first year includes creating an environmental informnation base,

designating preservation areas, adapting interim management criteria, and identifying

Intensely Developed Areas (optional). The second year involves the development of local

plans and ordinances for zoning, subdivisions, erosion and sedimentation control,

I ~~stormwater management and building permit regulations. The Criteria does not affect

3 ~~~existing laws or agencies (e.g. State Water Control Law) nor does it limit local authority

with regard to planning, zoning and subdividing. In essence, the Criteria provides a

3 ~~vehicle for localities to increase environmental protection through the adoption of more

stringent planning regulations.

U ~~~~The Commonwealth of Virginia is responsible for providing resources to localities

3 ~~~for implementation of the provisions of the Act, and for ensuring that all state agencies

act in harmony with the goals of the Act. In accordance with Virginia legislative

3 ~~tradition, localities maintain the bulk of the regulatory power and implementation

responsibility. While the State has promulgated some mandatory provisions, the relevant

I ~~~agencies primarily play a supportive role.

3 ~~~~The Chesapeake Bay Act planning criteria highlights several points relevant to

Lancaster County planning initiatives. While the Act requires the inclusion of resource

3 ~~protection objectives in the local planning process, such a planning approach is not new

* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~21

to Lancaster County. An extraordinarily high level of concern for, and knowledge of the3

natural resources which grace the County have been exhibited by residents and

governmental officials for some time. The following section addresses resourceI

management objectives within the context of providing numerous policy3

recommendations for the County. These options are intended to assist Lancaster County

in charting a course for its future which is compatible with sustainable economic3

development, natural resource protection, and compliance with the Chesapeake Bay

Preservation Act with minimal modifications.I

B. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

The purpose of this section is to provide the County with goals, objectives and3

policies for consideration in their shoreline planning process. In the goals portion of

this section the authors suggest concepts for the County to consider endorsing inI

determining its future direction. The objectives represent a more detailed, issue

oriented listing of general activities which are implied by the goals. The policies

element provides concrete items upon which the County can act to implement the3

objectives in order to pursue the goals.

The County should agree on goals which will guide future actions. By focusing onI

goals, the County should clearly indicate its position on shoreline management issues.3

Once goals have been decided upon, it is imperative that they be implemented. In most

cases, each resource which we have analyzed has numerous policy suggestions. We ask3

that the reader examine them all and identify those that are appropriate. However, we

also ask that the proposed regulations be viewed as a two sided coin: on one side theI

obvious reaction to regulation is that it is an imposition on a person's rights (property, or5

individual rights); on the other side, regulations preserve the rights of other residents in

the community. The notion of regulations as preserving rights is particularly relevant3

when considering environmental regulations. The environmental impacts of human

activity do not stop at political boundaries, let alone property boundaries. By regulatingI

223

individual activities, local officials are protecting the welfare of local residents. The

reader is encouraged to consider all of the recommendations contained In this section

3 ~~and support, advocate or implement those deemed appropriate. All of the

recommendations were listed to provide management options.

B. 1. Groundwater

I~~~~ol
� The County should ensure that present and future County residents have an
adequate supply of potable water.
�Degradation of water quality caused by the use of septic tank sewage systems
should be prevented.
* Efficient use of groundwater should be maximized.
* The amount of groundwater available to contribute to streams during low flow
periods should-~be preserved.

9 The quantity and quality of water in the deep aquifers should be protected.
Objectives
- Those who currently rely upon wells that are vulnerable to contamination should
be protected.
-The potential of septic tank contamination of shallow groundwater resources
should be minimized.
* The County should incorporate public health concerns associated with septic
I ~ ~~~~tanks into their subdivision approval process.
* The efficiency and longevity of septic systems should be increased by ensuring
proper maintenance and reducing domestic water consumption.
*Per capita water consumption should be reduced by imposing conservation

3 *~~~~ The potential for underground storage tank contamination of groundwater
supply should be minimized.
* Withdrawal of ground water should be limited to rates that do not cause further
I ~ ~~~~intrusion of salt water.
* Recharge areas, highly permeable soils and areas with a high water table should
3 ~~~~~be protected.
* Information regarding proper waste disposal should be distributed.

* ~~~Policies
* Water conservation devices in the construction of new homes prior to the
3 ~~~~~issuance of a building permit should be required.

* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~23

* Water conservation practices for existing development should be adopted and
applied.
* Limitations should be placed on the construction of impervious surfaces
(especially on highly permeable soils and areas with a high water table).
� An 18 inch minimum separation should be maintained between suitable soils
and groundwater.
* In suitable soils, the minimum recommended distance between edges of the tile
fields and water bodies should be 100 feet.
* Require a certificate of septic tank inspection and maintenance be submitted
every four or five years with local tax payments. The inspection could be
undertaken by the person who pumps the tank or by the local sanitation officer.
* The County should encourage development which promotes infiltration of
stormwater runoff.
� All contaminated wells should be located and recorded.
* All abandoned wells should be capped.
* In cooperation with the State Health Department, The County should develop
public education programs for rural homeowners, farmers, well drillers and
citizens regarding well water quality, septic tank construction and
maintenance, and the proper use of fertilizers and pesticides.

B. 2. Surface Water

Goals
* The County should protect all remaining land which is suitable for water supply
impoundments based on land cost, current development densities and surface
water flow rates.
� Water quality standards that restore the integrity of the aquatic ecosystem
should be achieved and maintained.
Objectives

� To prioritize impoundment sites to be acquired.
* To utilize the impoundment site(s) for recreational opportunities for County
residents at least until the impoundment is needed as a source of drinking
water.
� To minimize sedimentation of surface waterbodies.
* To promote development which minimizes stormwater runoff.

Policy
�The County should acquire at least one impoundment site for future drinking
water supply.
�Post development runoff rates equal to pre development rates should be
required.
�Best Management Practices should be required for stormwater facilities,
construction sites, and agricultural and silvicultural activities prior to the
issuance of a building permit.

B. 3. Soils

Goals
�Soil resources should be conserved.
�The importance and vulnerability of soils with a high shrink swell potential, are
highly permeable and areas with a high water table should be recognized.
� The County should ensure that soil erosion is minimized.
a Residents should be educated as to the limitations of the soil, the pressures
generated by conflicting demands over this resource and steps which can be
taken to resolve these conflicts.
Objectives
* Optimal locations for future solid waste disposal sites should be determined.

a The feasibility of a multi-county solid waste recycling effort should be explored.
� A data base which can be used on a site specific basis for evaluating
development capacity should be assembled.
� The County should prevent sheet runoff over high erosion areas such as steep
slopes or highly erodible soils.
�Peak runoff rates should be reduced.

�Disturbance of vegetative cover should be minimized.

� Exposure of soils to weathering at construction sites should be minimized.
* The area disturbed during construction should be minimized.
* Land best suited for agricultural use should be protected.

Policies
* Stormwater retention and infiltration should be required in new construction.
* Local recycling initiatives should be encouraged.
�Development should be directed away from soils which have a high water table,
percolate rapidly or are highly erodible.
- The County should contract with a soil scientist, on a consulting basis, to
evaluate soil suitability and site plans.
� The County should study the applicability and feasibility of compiling a
geographic or resource information system (GIS or RIS).
� The County should require detailed erosion and sedimentation plans including
vegetation disturbance plans prior to issuing a building permit.

B. 4. Wetlands

Goals
�To provide adequate areas adjacent to wetlands to allow for their future
migration, thus preserving (and possibly expanding) the wetlands acreage in the
County.
�To have zero net loss of tidal and non-tidal wetlands.

Obj ectives
� To Inventory the remaining natural areas of the County to determine the mostI
ecologically valuable areas.
� To protect wetlands as a habitat for flora and fauna.3
� To ensure that, if wetland development is unavoidable, measures be taken to
mitigate the damage.
� To prevent pollution and contamination of wetlands.I
Policies
� The County should commission the completion of a County Natural HeritageI
Program inventory of rare and endangered species.
� All projects involving wetlands impacts should have a pre-and post-construction
site visit.
* The Wetlands Board should work closely with the County legal staff to ensure
enforcement of and compliance with the Wetlands Ordinance.

� Permitting that takes place after wetlands have been altered should be
elimiated. This should be pursued through cooperating with the County Legal

a Acquire the most ecologically valuable and sensitive areas which remain
undisturbed.
* Those wishing to alter or develop wetland areas should demonstrate thatI
proposed activities cannot be located at upland sites.
� The County should use a point system to review the Impact of development
proposals on wetlands This could be instituted through special permit
procedures. Such a procedure could incorporate permit requirements
regarding project design and site conditions for uses that impact wetlands.
� "No Wake" requirements should be established in areas where the tidalI
shoreline is vulnerable to high wave action.
� The County should establish a fund to which contributions could be made by
those who destroy a tidal or non-tidal wetland. The money in the fund would beI
used to acquire the most ecologically valuable wetland areas in the County.

* The 1973 wetlands inventory of tidal wetlands should be updated.3
* Draining and filling of tidal and non-tidal wetlands should be avoided.
* A buffer should be required between wetlands and upland activities.3
* Cluster developments should be encouraged to protect wetlands as undisturbed
open areas.

B. 5. Shellfish
Goal3

*To maintain and restore productivity of shellfish producing areas in Lancaster
County.3
Objectives
* To continue and expand efforts to replenish local shellfish populations.3
* To minimize the potential for condemnation of shellfish beds.

2 63

* To reduce pollutant loaqdings to the waterways of the County which have an
I ~ ~~~~adverse mpact on the quaity and quantity of shellfish.
� To educate the boating community about contamination of shellfish from
Poice mproper discharge of sewage.

� Establish a shellfish grounds restoration and preservation program to be funded
I ~ ~~~~through a marina user fee.
� Placement of shell on the bottom to provide suitable substrate for shellfish
growth should be continued.
I *~~~~ Prohibit the establishment or expansion of marina facilities which would result
in shellfish bed closures.
1 *~~~~ Enforcement of state regulations requiring sewage holding tank pump-out
facilities should be rigorously pursued at marina facilities.
* Marinas should be required to install proper sewage disposal systems and
I ~ ~~~~provide adequate buffering or control zones around maintenance areas.
� Fuel stations should be equipped with automatic shut-off devices and adequate
signage to instruct boaters about proper fueling procedures.
� Marina operators should be encouraged to distribute fact sheets provided by the
County regarding p roper maintenance procedures for holding tank effluent
disposal and tips for minimizing impacts of painting boat bottoms.

B. 6. Coastal Flood Hazards
3 ~~Goals
*The construction of permanent and/or seasonal residences in the flood plain
3 ~~~~should be minimized.
*All structures that lie within the flood hazard zone should be in compliance with
all building and construction requirements.
3 ~~Objectives
* A revolving loan fund should be established to assist low and moderate income
residents in bringing current structures in flood hazard areas into compliance
with code.
� Land in the flood hazard zone should be acquired for recreational and research
5 ~~~~~purposes.
Policies
*~~~~~ *High hazard areas should be zoned for the lowest rural density.
* Capital facilities and infrastructure should be sited out of flood hazard zones.
* Industrial, commercial and retail land uses in the flood hazard zone should be
I ~ ~~~~restricted to water dependent activity.
* Regulations for site development and construction techniques in the flood
hazard zone should be strengthened and an emphasis should be placed on
monitoring and enforcement.

* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~27

B. 7. Shoreline Erosion

* To recognize and protect the integrity of the shoreline as a dynamic system.

Objectives
� The County should develop policies, in cooperation with the Wetlands Board,
which ensure non-structural shoreline protection wherever feasible.
� The County should encourage location of all uses in areas that minimize the need
for shore hardening.
�Shoreline stabilization and flood protection measures should be designed andI
constructed so that downstream property will not be adversely affected.

Policies

* A setback for shoreline structures equal to or greater than thirty times the
average historical rate of erosion should be required.3
* The use of vegetation for shoreline stabilization should be encouraged as a
substitute for shore hardening structures.
� The preservation of an undisturbed vegetated buffer along the shoreline should3
be required.
� Immediate shoreline re-vegetation should be required following land clearingI

* Where shoreline stabilization is permitted, it should be located landward of
vegetated wetlands and should be limited to the use of rip rap.3
* Land clearing activities along the shoreline should be minimized.

B. 8. Public Access5

Goal
*Adequate sites and facilities should be provided to meet the recreational needs3
of residents.
Objectives

*Citizen participation should be encouraged in determining recreational needs
and priorities.
*Lancaster County should initiate and coordinate multi-county efforts at providingI
regional recreational facilities.
*Private sector cooperation and involvement should be encouraged in meeting
recreational needs.I
Policies
� Additional staff should be hired with a job description consistent with the publicI
access goal.
� A consistent source of funding should be provided for site acquisition and
management of public recreation sites.
� An outdoor recreation plan should be produced (including user projections, site
identification, proposed uses, site and facility cost estimates, and schedule for
the completion of each project).

2 83

3 ~~C. ZONING

The zoning section of shoreline planning for Lancaster County should address the

3 ~~development patterns and environmental resources which distinguish this area from the

rest of the County. Many of the key issues regarding the shoreline have been previously

I ~~addressed for individual areas of concern. The zoning ordinance is the means by which

3 ~~the comprehensive plan is Implemented and, as such, has the potential to direct County

policy. While general goals are much easier to adopt than specific policies, the most

3 ~~~important aspect of a policy is that it be clearly stated and consistently followed. The

following discussion will offer suggestions regarding the shoreline zoning ordinance

I ~~purpose, district names, densities and permitted uses.

Puriose

5 ~~~~The purpose section should be amended to incorporate environmental

considerations and protection of water quality of the Chesapeake Bay. For example, page

I ~~1 (6) undue density considerations should include environmental quality degradation.

Other purposes of the zoning ordinance could include:
1) To protect the health, safety and welfare of current and future generations of
County residents located along Lancaster's shoreline.

3 ~~~~2) To prevent degradation and promote the sustainable use of the following
resources: surface water, ground water, tidal and non-tidal wetlands, highly
productive agricultural and forestal soils, shellfish, finfish and the Chesapeake
3 ~~~~~~Bay.
3) To preserve rare or unique flora and fauna found in the County and to preserve
their respective habitat.
3 ~~~~4) To encourage development which is creative and innovative in balancing the
housing needs of a growing area which preserves the natural resource base.

Cluster Develonment3

it should be the policy of the County to encourage the clustering of housing when

such developments:3

A. Preserve the environmental integrity of the site by protecting and/or3

promoting the preservation of features such as stream valleys, desirable vegetation, open

space, farmland, and either:3
(1) Produce a more efficient and practical development, or
(2) Provide land necessary for public or community facilities.

B. Is In accordance with the adopted comprehensive plan and the established

character of the area. To accomplish this end, the cluster subdivision should beI

designed to maintain the character of the area by preserving, where applicable, rural3

views along major roads and from surrounding properties through the use of open space,

buffers, minimum yard requirements, varied lot sizes, landscaping or other measures.3

In a proposed residential subdivision, a cluster subdivision could be required if

the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors determines that clusterI

development will promote the public interest by-.

1) Conserving scenic, natural and/or historic resources orI
2) Mitigating industrial, residential and/or agricultural (and other related uses)
interface problems or
3) Maintaining the existing general character of the land, area or preserving land
values.
In the approval of a cluster subdivision, the applicable density or use limitations3

for the district should be flexible. The Board could approve a modification to the

minimum lot size and/or minimum yard requirements when they conclude that such3

modifications are consistent with the purpose of this section and the applicable zoning

district.

Within every residential cluster development there should be planned and set3

aside permanently an amount of open space to be maintained exclusively for recreation

and/or conservation purposes. The amount of such open space should not be less than3

60% of the net developable area of the site.

303

3 ~~~Density Bonuses

The permitted number of dwelling units allowed should be increased upon the

1 ~~~granting of a density bonus by the Board of Supervisors. Upon application, the Board of

Supervisors could grant density bonuses in accordance with the following actions upon

I ~~~finding that the increased density would not impair the character of the area and would

3 ~~~be in the best interests of the general public. A density bonus equalling 10% could be

awarded for each condition (specified below) which is met by the cluster development.
� Dedication of land accepted by the County. Such land could be dedicated for use
I ~ ~~~~as a park site, or other public facility and shall be suitable for the proposed use.
* Undertaking an archaeological survey of the site according to guidelines
provided by the Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission.
* Preserving any archaeological or historic site or structure judged to be of
significant by the Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission or the Lancaster
3 ~~~~County Historic Landmarks Commission.
� Undertaking an endangered species survey of the site according to guidelines
provided by The Virginia Natural Heritage Program.
5 *Preervng n is atrlsae any area demonstrated to be a habitat for any
endagerd, are orthrateed species of plant or wildlife (and an appropriate
bufer rea sodesgnaedby the State of Virginia's Natural Heritage Program,
thefedralgovrnmntor listed in Rare and Endancgered Vascular Plant
SDecles in Virmlnfla. (Duncan M. Porter, Virginia Polytechnic institute and State

U ~~District Names

3 ~~~~To accurately reflect the level of environmental sensitivity, we recommend that

areas which require the greatest attention regarding natural resources be designated as a

3 ~~~conservation district. The sensitive area adjacent to the conservation district could be

called the management district. The name preservation is not applicable to either of

1 ~~~these physical areas as it is connotative of a prohibition of development. It is

3 ~~~recommended that the name preservation area be utilized by the County when it

purchases areas for conservation or recreation related uses.

Conservation District

I ~~~~In a conservation district, the County should limit uses to those which are water

5 ~~~dependent. Where commercial activity is established special environmental

*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 31

performance standards should be adopted. Furthermore, shoreline areas which are the
least environmentally vulnerable to degradation should be designated for commercial or
industrial water dependent uses. The uses which are allowed in a conservation areaI
should be very limited. The larger the geographic area encompassed in such a3

designated area, the more diverse will be its uses. Therefore, while it is impossible to

prescribe an appropriate listing of perrmitted uses at this juncture, we have generated a3

list of uses which should be permitted in any such area.

By Right Uses
� Single-family dwellings for use of year-round residents.I
� Individual manufactured homes for year-round residents.
� Cluster Developments.I
� Off-street parking as required.
� General farming, agriculture, dairying, forestry and horticulture.I
* Preserves and conservation areas.3
* Recreational areas.
*Areas of basic finfish and shellfish processing facilities such as oyster shucking
houses and crab houses which are dependent on a waterfront location for their
viability. It is up to the applicant to prove that the proposed use is waterI
dependent and could not be located outside of the conservation area.

*Public boat docks and/or ramps.3
*County sanctioned public facilities.
*Public utilities and facilities for the provision and maintenance of public utilities
including water and sewer installations and electricity.I
Conditional Uses3
* Single-family dwellings for use of seasonal residents.
* Individual manufactured homes for use of seasonal residents.3
� Schools and churches.
* Lodges and hunting clubs.3
*Portable sawmills for temporary logging operations.
*Yacht clubs, marinas, boat railways (with repair) boat building and docks.3
*Cemeteries.
*Golf courses.3
*Private boat docks and/or ramps.
323

Densities

The residential density of the conservation district should consider the size of

the zone being regulated. If the land area is very large, the density should not be too

large, or middle income residents will be excluded. Yet, the lot should be large enough

to allow for an alternative septic drainfield site, a minimal percentage of impervious

surfaces, and to allow for the utilization of groundwater as a water supply.

The conservation zone should include all property from the shoreline landward

1500 feet. Based on this geographic boundary, the density for residential subdivisions in

the management should be I dwelling unit for every 5 acres.

There can be misunderstandings regarding proposed densities. In order to avoid

misrepresentations as to what is allowed and what is not, land that is not developable

under existing County ordinances should not be utilized in density calculations. Such a

policy would make it easier to evaluate and administer the regulations, and aid the public

in assessing the merits of larger developments.

Guidelines for Sustainable Development in the Conservation District.
a Water Conservation Devices: Currently, the most common devices in use are
toilets that use no more than 1.6 gallons of water per flush, kitchen faucets,
lavatory faucets and (primarily in commercial or industrial buildings) urinals. It is
recommended that all of these devices be required in new buildings constructed
in the conservation district, unless the applicant for a building permit can prove
that the installation of these deviceswould prove an undue hardship. At a
minimum, it is recommended that low-flow toilets be required before a building
permit is issued.
* Soil Conservation Plan: The County should require the submission of a
vegetationprotection plan (or soil conservation plan) prior to issuance of a
building permit. Such a plan should call for the protection of all trees in excess of
6 inches in diameter. Their protection should extend to the area encompassed
by their canopy and could be ensured by roping off, or otherwise delineating, the
protection area. All clearing limits should be clearly marked and observed. A
20% waterfront viewshed clearing should be permitted given that an reasonable
steps are taken to ensure the preservation of trees in excess of 6 inches in
diameter.
* Im-Dervious Surfaces: All development projects, proposals, and designs in the
conservation district should limit the construction of impervious surfaces and
areas not allowing natural drainage. Impervious surfaces should not exceed 20%
of the developable area of the lot unless the applicant can effectively demonstrate,
through innovative design, that the protection provided by the design would be
equal to, or exceed, the protection afforded by the 20% limitation. In all cases,
the first 1/2 inch of rainfall should be retained on the site.

Runoff Control: In order to obtain any variance from the above water quality
protection provisions, the person submitting a subdivision application should be
required to prove that post development runoff rates will not exceed pre-I
development rates. These calculations should take into account the runoff from
any surfaces draining on to the property.I

Management District3

The variety of uses which are allowed in a management district are dependent on

its size. The larger the geographic area encompassed in such a designated area, the3

more diverse will be its uses. Therefore, while it is impossible to prescribe an

appropriate listing of permitted uses at this juncture, we have generated a list of usesI

which should be permitted in any such area. Additionally, the County should consider3

using overlay districts (or in some way delineating an appropriate area to allow for

necessary commercial, retail or industrial uses. Such an area should be delineated by a3

growth boundary within which public services should be concentrated.

B~yRight Uses3
*Single-family dwellings for use of year-round residents.
*Individual manufactured homes for year-round residents.3
*Duplexes.
*Townhouses.3
*Cluster Developments.
*Off-street parking as required.I
*General farming, agriculture, dairying, forestry and horticulture.
*Preserves and conservation areas.3
*Recreational areas.
*Areas of basic flinfish and shellfish processing facilities such as oyster shucking
houses and crab houses which are dependent on a waterfront location for their3
viability. It is up to the applicant to prove that the proposed use is water
dependent and could not be located outside of the conservation area.
*County sanctioned public facilities.I
*Facilities for the provision and maintenance of public utilities including water
and sewer installations and electricity.3
*Cemeteries.

343

Conditional Uses

* Single-family dwellings for use of seasonal residents.

* Individual manufactured homes for use of seasonal residents.

* Open air market for locally caught fresh seafood.

5 *~~~~ Townhouses.

3 *~~~~~ Golf courses.

* Roadside stand.

Density

I ~~~~The residential density of the management area should consider the size of the

3 ~~~zone being regulated. If the land area is very large, the density should not be too large,

or middle income residents will, for all intents and purposes, be excluded. Yet, the lot

5 ~~~should be large enough to allow for an alternative septic drainfield site, a minimal

percentage of impervious surfaces, and residential density must be low enough to allow

I ~~~for the utilization of groundwater as a water supply.

3 ~~~~The management zone should include land which is between the 50 foot contour

and the conservation area (1500 feet from the shoreline). Based on this geographic

3 ~~boundary, the suggested density for residential subdivisions in the management is I

dwelling unit for every 2 acres.

I ~~~~There can be misunderstandings regarding proposed densities. In order to avoid

misrepresentations as to what is allowed and what is not, land that is not developable

under existing County ordinances should not be utilized in density calculations. Such a

3 ~~~policy would make it easier to evaluate and administer the regulations, and aid the public

in assessing the merits of larger developments.

1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 35

Guidelines for Sustainable Develotnment in the Management District.
o Water Conservation Devices: Currently, the most common devices in use are
toilets that use no more than 1.6 gallons or water per flush, kitchen faucets,
lavatory faucets and (primarily in commercial or industrial buildings) urinals. It is
recommended that all of these devices be required in new buildings constructedI
in the conservation district, unless the applicant for a building permit can prove
that the installation of these devices would prove an undue hardship. At a
minimum, it is recommended that low-flow toilets be required before a building
permit Is issued.

* Soil Conservation Plan: The County should require the submission of a vegetation3
protection plan (or soil conservation plan) prior to issuance of a building permit.
Such a plan could call for the protection of all trees in excess of 6 inches in
diameter. Their protection extend to the area encompassed by their canopy and
should be ensured by roping off, or otherwise delineating, the protection area. AllI
clearing limits should be clearly marked and observed.

* Impervious Surfaces: All development projects, proposals, and designs in the
conservation district should limit the construction of impervious surfaces and
areas not allowing natural drainage. Impervious surfaces should not exceed 30%
of the developable area of the lot unless the applicant can effectively demonstrate,
through Innovative design, that the protection provided by the design would be
equal to, or exceed, the protection afforded by the 30% limitation. In all cases,
the first 1/2 inch of rainfall should be retained on the site.
* Runoff Control: In order to obtain any variance from the above water quality
protection provisions, the person submitting a subdivision application should be
required to prove that post development runoff rates will not exceed pre-
development rates. These calculations should take into account the runoff from
any surfaces draining on to the property.3

D. SUBDIVISION

The purpose of the subdivision section is to establish guidelines for developers3

and potential homebuilders. The comprehensive plan has outlined certain goals,

objectives and policies that will help the County pursue their vision for future

development. The subdivision section provides for implementation through ordinances3

that should be consistent with the other planning documents and ordinances. This

section reviews the existing subdivision ordinance for Lancaster County and3

recommends changes that will assist the County in formulating policy options, policy

implementation and establishing a systematic procedure for evaluating subdivision

proposals. The critical resources that the comprehensive plan focuses on are addressed

in this section.

Before beginning a detailed analysis of specific impacts of development on

environmentally sensitive areas and reviewing the ordinance, some general observations

are in order. No regulatory program can be effective if it is insufficiently funded.

363

5 ~~Furthermore, those who generate the need for increased County efforts should bear the

costs of financing monitoring and enforcement activities. Currently, the County is

I ~~~subsidizing the cost of processing subdivision proposals through general property taxes.
The County should utilize its statutory authority to increase the charge for subdivision

I ~~applications from the maximum $150.00 charged today, to a cost which more accurately

I ~~~reflects the resources required to evaluate and monitor subdivision proposals. The State
Code allows for a maximum fee of $1,000.00 for subdivision applications. With the

I ~~~expanded regulatory role given to localities. including Lancaster County, the fee charged
should be substantially Increased in order to facilitate an adequate level of review and an

I ~~~equitable financing structure.

I ~~~~Table I lists the criteria and issues that many subdivision ordinances address.

The horizontal axis lists the critical resources that we think should be protected. The

5 ~~vertical axis (y) lists the components that make up a subdivision ordinance. The column

labeled Lancaster County is our assessment on the adequacy of the present subdivision

I ~~ordinance in addressing these concerns. This table demonstrates the degree to which

5 ~~different components of the subdivision ordinance relate to resources and potential

impacts. The goal of the County should be to strengthen the pertinent elements of their

3 ~~~ordinance to ensure that all vulnerable resources have the proper guidelines and

procedures in place to protect them.

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3

Table 1

Lancaster County Subdivision Ordinance Review

Component
Ground Surface
Lancaster Water Water Erosion Wetlands Slope
Countv Impact _Imnact Imn)act Impnact Im-Dact
Purpose weak some import import import import

Definition weak Import import import import import

Exceptions yes import Import import Import import

Design yes import import import import import

Street weak import import import import import
Layout
Setback some import import import import import
Requirements

Private some some some some some some
Roads

L ot some import import import import import
Dimensions
Waterfront none import import import import import
Access

Land some import import import import import
Suitability

Water Buffers some import import import import import

Water some import import import import import
Dependent
Uses

Shoreline some import import import import import
Stabilization

Tree none import import import import import
Protection

Flood some import import import import import
Proofing

Open Space none import import import import import

Preservation some import import import import import
Area

Water Supply none some some some some some

Septic some import import import import import

Ag. and Forest none some some some some some
Preservation

The chart visually shows the need for the County to amend the subdivision

ordinance. We think that the column labeled Lancaster County should read strong for

5 ~~each component.

D. 1. Groundwater ImTnact

I ~~~~The existing subdivision control ordinance addresses groundwater protection

3 ~~~indirectly. The purpose statement of the ordinance explains that the objective is to

create conditions favorable to health, safety, convenience and prosperity. If the

5 ~~groundwater becomes contaminated or depleted, the County will have failed to create

these conditions. Therefore, a legal case could be presented that the regulation and

I ~~conservation of groundwater are important to maintain consistency with the purpose.

3 ~~~~Section 5-5, lot size, directly addresses groundwater impacts. It describes the

footage needed to install a sewer and water system. Section 5-9, private water and/or

1 ~~sewer stipulates that the type of water and sewer system installed must meet the
standards of the Water Control Board, the State Health Department, and any other state

I ~~~or local agency having authority over such installations. While these regulations are

5 ~~useful, they do not offer any management controls for sewage disposed of by septic tanks

or water supplied by wells. This is a major deficiency since an overwhelming majority of

3 ~~shoreline residents sewer and water needs are meet through the use of septic systems

and private wells.

I ~~~~We recommend that the County impose further regulations to insure that proper

3 ~~steps are taken to protect groundwater.

* Wells in all major subdivisions over 10 units should tap the deep aquifer.
I~~~~~ *The purchase of tap fees should be required as amethod of monitoring and
managing the number of wells dug each year.
- Larger subdivisions should be required to bore fewer wells. This
recommendation could be implemented by regulating the numi er of permits
per number of units. For example, for every 10 lots allow only one well.

3 *~~~~ The use of building materials that are perv-ious should be required.

* The County should promote the installation of water gauges that measure the
water consumption of houses and subdivisions.

1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~39

D. 2. Surface Water IrnDactI

Portions of the existing subdivision control ordinance partially address the impact

of development on surface water quality. However, amendments should be considered inI

order to increase the level of environmental protection.3

Section 5-4, lot size, will have an Impact on water quality. Additionally, the size of

the building on the lot is a complementary factor which should be considered. The3

building will create an impervious surface that obstructs the percolation of water into the

ground. In addition to reducing groundwater recharge, this condition also contributesU

runoff into tributaries. In light of this situation, the following management policies are3

offered for consideration.
�Impervious surfaces should cover no more than 20% of the lot. If this creates an
undue hardship for the applicant, a variance could be granted if the applicant
can show that best management practices will attain the same level OF
protection.

* The topography of the lot should be considered in site plan review.I

*Grading and filling should occur only on 50% of the lot.3

*Developments on lots with a slope greater than 15% should avoided when
possible and conditionally approved when there is no feasible alternative..
* Land disturbing activities on slopes greater than 25% should be prohibited.3

Section 5-6 regulates building set back and sideline restrictions. Presently, these

regulations apply to all lots. For parcels not adjacent to water or fronting water theI

ordinance is adequate. However, for parcels in proximity to surface water bodies, a more3

detailed and conservative regulation should be considered. The County should consider

adopting the following environmental provisions.3

*The distance from the mean water line to construction site should be extended
to a minimum of 100 feet.3

*The area between the building and shoreline should be kept in a natural state.

*View corridors that retain 80% of the existing vegetation should be required.

*Impervious surfaces should be minimized. Plats should document their
presence as a percentage of coverage of the buildable lot and in total square
footage.3

Section 5-7 recognizes that properly installed and maintained septic tanks can be

a viable method of disposing of human waste. This section does a fairly good job covering5

403

areas that could cause concern. However, the County should plan ahead for the time

when septic tanks fail, which could be anywhere from seven to thirty years. In order to

5 ~~~implement this policy, the following modification is suggested.
*A suitable site for a second septic drainfield should be required on the building
site. This reserve drainfield site should be shown on the subdivision plat map
I ~ ~~~~and building should be prohibited on the area of the reserve field.

3 ~~~D. 3. SoilSutblv

5 ~~~~The current ordinance does contain provisions regarding soil suitability.

However, by amending some sections the County could provide a more comprehensive

I ~~regulatory framework within which development could take place.

*The County should strengthen section 5-1 (mutual responsibility and suitability
of land) to require the subdivider to prove that their proposal meets a certain
standard level of land suitability for all subdivisions greater than 10 units.
*The developer should be required to provide profiles of soil characteristics not
just for percolation rates (as required by section 5-2). but for shrink swell soils
and water table levels.
*The location and characteristics of the soils should be analyzed together and
1 ~ ~~~~should not be considered mutually exclusive (as currently set forth in 5-7).
D. 4. Erosion IMDact

I ~~~~Most of the erosion impact analysis and mitigation methods are covered in the

3 ~~erosion and sediment control section. However, during the pre-development and post-

development stages of construction, the potential exists for substantial damage to occur

3 ~~~to sensitive resources. Therefore, in this section we have included a check list of

information which we think the County should consider as a requirement for land

I ~~development. Such a checklist would ensure that land is developed in an

3 ~~environmentally proper manner. Such a checklist could be incorporated into the

development process by signing an agreement to abide with terms set forth in order to

5 ~~~receive subdivision approval or a building permit.

4 1

Pre- and Post Development Checklist for ProDertv Owners and Developers

Pre-DeveloDment

The County could require all applicants to submit the following material to the

staff of the planning commission.
� Soils, slopes, natural and drainage patterns should be mapped.
� Natural vegetation and proposed alterations should be mapped.

� An erosion and sediment control maintenance plan should be submitted.
� Buffer areas and drainageways to exist during and after construction should be
identified.
� Pervious surfaces should be used where possible: gravel access roads, driveways
(also can be brick, "grasscrete", etc.). Impervious driveways should be
prohibited.
� Vegetated buffers should be maintained along roadways
� On site natural vegetation should be preserved to the fullest possible extent:
limit lawn space, and the use of chemical lawn products should be discouraged.
* Land between the shoreline or tributaries and the construction site should not
be cleared for any purpose other than the construction of docks where
permiltted.
� Fill dirt and exposed soils should be covered while construction is not in
progress.
* Clearing or grading should be prohibited on slopes greater than 15%.
� Hay bales and silt fences should be required to protect tributaries and shorelines
from runoff. They should be maintained to ensure their effectiveness.

� Natural drainageways should be preserved where possible.
� Introduction of foreign vegetation in landscaping should be minimized.
� Splash plates should be installed and maintained under all drainspouts to
prevent channelization of rainwater.
� Docks and other water access structures should be constructed only for small
craft and low-scale access, on properties with shoreline slope less than 15%,
and not in areas with viable shellfish beds, wetlands, or areas already delineated
to have high levels of erosion.

Post-Development

* Site clean-up should commence expeditiously, no later than one week from end
of project (major construction, not to include cosmetic work).
� Site clean-up should include disposal and/or stabilization of all collected
sediments. This should take place prior to removal of erosion and
sedimentation control devices.
� Extra fill dirt, gravel, and other construction materials should be included in the
clean-up requirement.
* Fines for exceeding clean-up time should be approximately $1,000/day, with the
County to begin clean-up after the allotted one week period, using developer's
submitted clean-up plan.

* Re-vegetation of site should occur as soon as possible following construction.

* Chemically created or fortified lawns should be discouraged.
� The self-maintenance program should be adhered to by the owner after
I ~ ~~~~occupation of the site anct should include:
1. Monitoring stormnwater runoff patterns (correcting drainage patterns as
necessary to prevent fouling of waters caused by runofi);
2. Maintenance of vegetation in buffer zones;
3. Maintenance of pervious surfaces in order to retain their effectiveness (e.g.
I ~ ~~~~~repairing gravel driveways to prevent exposure of underlying soils).
� Home gardens should be located in environmentally stable
areas, planted or covered during the growing season, and covered during the
off-season (tarps, mulch, or hay are recommended).
Conclusion

I ~~~~When the County adopts and Implements ordinances that provide additional

5 ~~resource protection, some residents may not understand the need for these actions. To

increase local understanding of the difficult decisions which the County confronts, the

5 ~~County should consider producing educational materials or conducting informal sessions

to inform residents and developers of the need for taking additional regulatory action.

I ~~Furthermore, a shoreline review committee composed of diverse interest groups could

be formed to improve the understanding of development impacts on the shoreline

environment. The purpose of stricter ordinances that establish higher performance

3 ~~standards is to improve efficient utilization of natural resources and better management

of residential growth.

g ~~E. FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE EVALUTATION

As a result of the creation of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

3 ~~localities have begun to regulate activities within flood prone areas. In Lancaster County,

the areas regulated consist of the 100 year Flood Plain as designated by flood insurance

I ~~rate maps (FIRMs) for the county dated March 1988, the Coastal Flood Plain (A Zone),

I ~~which are subject to 100 Year Coastal floods and the Coastal High Hazard Area (V Zone)
subject to high velocity waters and wave action. A building permit is required for

5 ~~construction activities within a flood plain district, indicating that development activities

1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~43

are permitted in these areas. AlU new construction must meet certain standards

requiring adequate anchoring to withstand flotation. New construction within the A

Zone is required for the lowest floor subject to flooding be designed to allow theI

equalization of hydrostatic forces on the exterior walls. In addition, manufactured homes3

must be elevated and anchored above the base flood elevation. In the V-Zone, no

development is allowed below the base flood elevation. Exceptions are allowed for3

structures landward of mean high tide and those which are elevated above the base flood

level.

Recomnmendations to improve the Floodplain Management Ordinance center3

around the need for increased efforts on monitoring and enforcement. The present

system requires the individual to obtain a building permit. At this stage, the County3

enforces the floodplain ordinance. However. in reality, the property specific boundaries

are hard to identily and regulations are difficult to enforce without a property survey.

Technical and financial constraints involved with site surveys in Lancaster County center5

around the lack of accessible bench markers which are necessary for an accurate survey.

At the present time, the Floodplain Management Ordinance is reasonably well

written. However, the constraints of adequate resources for monitoring and

enforcement are a major obstacle in the implementation. Detailed flood maps are

available at the Lancaster County Land Use Administrators office. Individuals are3

encourage to review these maps. If their parcel could be/or is in a flood prone area the

site should be surveyed in order to determine the elevation (and corresponding level of3

flood hazard). In order to improve its land management efforts in flood prone areas, the

following recommendations are offered.I
� Filling and grading should be restricted in floodprone areas.

� Detention ponds should be required in developments over 50 units.
� The County should consider the adoption of a stormwater management
ordinance.
� A site survey conducted by a certified engineer should be required with
subdivision applications. Specific attention should be paid to the relationship of
the home site and flood prone areas.3

441

GI/I ehooysol be utilized at a scale appropriate for site specific
wor. Prces a rik fr foodngshould be identified.

5 ~~~~For those who do reside in flood prone areas, the County should prepare an

evacuation plan. Special consideration should be directed to the handicapped as well as

5 ~~~individuals with communication restrictions (i.e. those who do not have a phone).

I ~~F. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL ORDINANCE

5 ~~~~The 1988 Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law (� 10. 1-560-� 10. 1-57 1)

replaces the 1973 code, maintaining its purpose of regulating land-disturbing activities

5 ~~in order to minimize erosion and sedimentation of any lands In the Commonwealth. The

state Erosion and Sediment Control Program (ESCP) is established by the law, creating a

I ~~~state board and dictating the adoption of local ESCPs, compatible with state law, by each

5 ~~~district, county, city, or town.

The state has the authority to devise a program to be used, should any locality fail

3 ~~to submit an ESCP. Any locality administering an ESCP may charge an application fee to

defray costs, to an amnount commuensurate with the services provided, or $1,000,

I ~~~whichever is less.

I ~~~~~Not all land-disturbing activities are covered under the law, with fourteen

exceptions listed in � 10. 1-560. Among them are: minor activities such as household

5 ~~~gardening, single family residences not on subdivided land, land areas less than 10,000

square feet, projects on the shoreline already approved by the local Wetlands Board, the

V ~~Marine Resources Commission, or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and tilling,

planting, and harvesting of agricultural and forest crops. These exceptions, along with

the remaining nine listed in the law, may have extreme repercussions for erosion and

U ~~~sedimentation in certain areas.
For those activities included under the law, such as clearing, grading, excavating

I ~~~and filling land, an ESCP must be submitted by the developer (applicant). The local

authority must approve or disapprove of the plan within 45 days, or it will be considered

1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~45

approved. Approved plans may be changed if further inspection proves the plan to be

unsatisfactory or if the applicant alters his plans. The local authority has the ability to

inspect the area in question periodically as well as request progress reports from theI

applicant. A notice-to-comply may be issued in cases of violations of the approved plan.3

Failure to comply may result In a revoked permit. At this point. violators may be charged

with a misdemeanor, and may be fined $ 1,000 or given a 30-day jail sentence. As well,

the violator may be found liable of civil damages, depending on the circumstances.

Localities are authorized to implement and enforce more stringent regulationsI

than are set forth in the state law. Even so, no regulation may limit the powers of the3

State Water Control Board, the Department of Mines, Minerals, and Energy, or the

provisions of the Virginia Oil and Gas Act.3

Lancaster County has responded with an Erosion and Sediment Control

Ordinance which closely reflects state goals (in effect July 1, 1975 in response to theI

1973 law). The ordinance establishes conservation standards, including criteria,3

guidelines, techniques and methods for controlling erosion and sedimentation. These

standards are set forth in the Erosion Sediment Control Handbook, which is issued for3

the use of the applicant. Since July 1, 1975, any person engaging In land-disturbing

activities has been required to submiAt a plan and comply with the ordinance beforeI

receiving a permit. Land-disturbing activities excepted from the law are defined3

similarly, with one exception. The state law includes agricultural engineering projects

(terracing, dikes, land drainage, etc.) as an exception, whereas the County does not. It is3

highly probable that these differences reflect the fact that Lancaster's Ordinance has not

been updated to correspond to the 1988 State provisions.I

As with the state program, the applicant's plan must be reviewed within 45 days,

or it is considered approved. The plan review fee is significantly dlffertnt form the

state's $1,000 limit - the County charges $25 for the first acre, plus $10 for each3

additional acre disturbed, with a maximum of $150.

463

3 ~~~~The County permitting authority includes the power to inspect and-disturbing

activity on-site at any reasonable time. Upon failure to comply with the approved plan,

j ~~the permit holder is served with a notice-to-comply. Further failure is considered a

violation, subject to a revocation of the permit. As with the state program, a violator may

be charged with a misdemeanor and be subject to penalties.

I ~~~~The Virginia Erosion and Sedimentation Control Law and the Lancaster County
Ordinance regulate the degradation of land and water through a permitting process. The

I ~~~state law serves as a guideline for localities to use in creating ordinances, allowing for

more stringent regulations to be created according to local needs. Lancaster County

I ~~should continue working with other localities and their state legislative representatives

to pursue authority to control single-family dwellings. With some revision, zoning

ordinance and construction permit requirements could be incorporated into the local

ESCP Ordinance to create an effective watershed erosion control regime. While

amendments to the ESCP Ordinance could address many of the deficiencies that

I ~~currently exist, the benefits obtained through such amendments will only be realized if

g ~~administration, oversight and enforcement efforts are increased. The importance of

having adequate qualified personnel will increase as build out occurs.

The exceptions allowed by the state law may serve to harm the water quality of

the Chesapeake Bay and Its tributaries. Therefore, an effort should be made through

I ~~~local ordinances to restrict certain activities in sensitive areas. Included in this could be

3 ~~home gardening plots in excess of one acre, livestock operations, agriculture-type

engineering operations, or any activity which effects the water table, such as wells, dams,

I ~~and ponds.

I ~~~~Local Ordinance/Handbook (handbook to be aonlicablt to all homebuilders)

The County needs to update the current local ordinance and handbook, adopting

stricter regulations and identifyring specific erosion and sediment control practices.

Regulations should truly be aimed at protecting water quality - ease and equity should not

1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 47

be the point of the ordinances. Specifically, land-disturbing activities should be

restricted or prohibited in areas highly susceptible to erosion - bluffs, areas on the

southeastern end of the County, land that is already eroding, and lands adjacent to I

shellfish habitats.3

*Permitting fees should be increased to allow for the consulting services of a civil
engineer or soil scientist.3
*Preliminary Plans" In the Handbook, "c." should be changed to read 'Temporary
and permanent means of erosion and sediment control" (striking "tentative").
Such a change in wording would dispel ambiguities and be more consistent with
the goals of the County.I
* Natural and any proposed artificial drainage areas should be mapped and
reviewed for effective stormnwater management.
* A section listing recommended/required practices should be inserted in the
ordinance. This will el arify the specifics of erosion and sediment control
requirements. The following requirements should be considered:�
1. Specific buffer zone requirements should be stated. Disturbances in the
buffer zone should be prohibited before, during, and after construction,
with the maintenance of natural vegetation stressed,1
2. The timing of grading, construction, erosion and sedimentation control,
and clean-up should be addressed.
3. Expected drainage areas should be outlined and natural drainage patterns5
retained to the fullest extent possible. Effective stormwater management
should be the priority here - impervious surfaces should be minimized at all
stages of construction (i.e. gravel access roads) and,
4. Regulations limiting and controlling exposed soils should be enforced.
Efforts should be made to minimize soil exposure through pre-planning,
covering fill dirt and excavated areas when not being used, such areas
be covered during al precipitation, and areas where filter barriers are to beI
placed should be specified.
� A provision should be added in the ordinance detailing clean-up
requirements. For example, all applicants should be required to submit clean-
up plans (including a timetable for completion). to engage in clean-up
operations no later than one week after the project is complete, and to be
finished in a timely fashion (relative to the size of the project, but not to exceed
one month).
* Violation should result in a sizeable fine ($1,000/day), which could help fund
immediate County clean-up of the site and offset the cost of montoring and
enforcement. This could be an ordinance for all applicants umndreurothetlw, asI
well as for some of those activities not covered by the State law (single family
non-subdivision types).

� Extreme violations should be addressed in that if any land disturbing activityI
creates an imminent danger to the shoreline, water quality, or adjacent
property owners, a stop-work order should be issued. At such time, the County
should require immediate clean-up with the stipulations of the above paragraph.3
� Clean-up should begin no later than 2 days after notification.
� A performance bond should be required. The amount of the bond should be
sufficient to reimburse the County for any expenses incurred in siteI

481

G. WETLANDS

Preservation of wetlands is an important to the integrity of the environmental

resources in the County. In addition, wetlands creation is often used as a best

management practice to prevent shoreline erosion. The creation of wetlands to control

shoreline erosion costs significantly less than shore hardening structures.21

Low lying vegetation such as grass, vines and shrubs are most effective in

preventing shoreline erosion. The most effective vegetative cover for shoreline erosion

control are smooth cordgrass and saltmeadow hay.22 Smooth cordgrass grows best

between the mean low tide and mean high tide elevations. Saltmeadow hay grows above

the mean high tide elevation. These grasses should be planted between the mean low

water elevation and the base of the bank.23 Tall shrubs and trees increase shoreline

erosion because they add weight to the bank, thus increasing the chances of sloughing.

Fallen trees undermined by erosion displace large quantities of soil and prevent the

establishment of low lying vegetation by blocking sunlight. Tall trees and shrubs should

have a minimum set back equal to the bank height.24

Monitoring and enforcement are the most serious problems in the protection of

wetlands.
* The County should commission a Lancaster County Natural Heritage Inventory of
rare and endangered species.
I All projects involving wetlands impacts should have a pre-and post-construction
site visit.
�The Wetlands Board should work closely with the County legal staff to ensure
enforcement of and compliance with the Wetlands Ordinance.
* The County should eliminate permitting that takes place after wetlands have
been altered. This should be pursued through cooperating with the County
Legal Staff.
� Best Management Practices should be required to prevent the disruption of
wetlands.

2 1-Best Management Practices for Shoreline Erosion Control," Virginia Soil and Water
Conservation Commission, Hill and Lee Shoreline Erosion Advisory Services, David
Lambert and B. B. Ross, Extension Assistants, p.4.
22 Ibid.
23 Ibid.
24 Ibid.

* The 1973 inventory of tidal wetlands in Lancaster should be updated.
* The Wetlands Board should continue to implement the recommendations of the
Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences.
* Landowners should consult with VIMS before committing resources to
shore hardening structures.
* The County should consider co-sponsoring workshops for land owners and
developers for wetlands protection.

Lancaster Countv Wetlands

The tidal wetlands in the County can be divided into fourteen distinct

geographical wetland areas.25 For management purposes, the fourteen wetland areas

can be grouped into six tidal wetland regions.26

Region I: 1. Indian Creek-Tabb's Creek;
2. Chesapeake Bay-Fleets Bay Area
This region consists primarily of individual marshes, while there are a few
large marshes. The larger marshes account for 66% of the wetlands in this
region and are vegetated by stands of black needlerush. The smaller
marshes are located in the upper portion of creeks and coves, and are
dominated by saltmarsh cordgrass.

Region II: 3. Rappahannock Bridge Area
This area contains 35 acres of marshes, most of which are undisturbed and
consist of saltmarsh cordgrass.

Region III: 4. Carter Creek
This area consists of a large number of small marshes which provide wildlife
refuges. Water hemp, an important food source for waterfowl, is a
predominant species in four marshes in this region.

Region IV: 5. Mouth-Eastern Shoreline of the Corrotoman;
6. Eastern Branch of the Corrotoman;
7. Western Branch of the Corrotoman;
8. Belwood and Lancaster Swamps;
9. Little Branch of Corrotoman;
10. Mouth-western shoreline of the Corrotoman

25"Lancaster County Tidal Marsh Inventory,"' Special Report No. 45 in Applied Marine Science
and Ocean Engineering, Gene M. Siberhorn, (Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences),
December 1973, p. 3.
26 Ibid. p.8.

The size of marshes is highly variable in this region. The total acreage is
475.8 acres with big cordgrass the dominant vegetative type.

Region V: 11. Wyatt-Paynes Creek Area;
12. Greenvale-Cage Creek Area
Nearly 105 acres of marshes make up region V. The four vegetative
communities are saltmarsh cordgrass, black needlerush, salt grass and salt
meadow hay, and saltbush communities.

Region VI: 13. Belle Isle;
14. Lancaster Creek
This area has the single largest marsh (156 acres) in the County. The
major vegetative types are cattail, big cordgrass, arrow-arum,
pickerelweed and wild rice.

These regions could be used to assist the County in managing its wetlands. Each region

has specific management needs which are included in Table 2.

Table 2
Wetlands Management Analysis

Region Plant Community Threats Priority Management
I Black Needlerush Previous dredging Very high Focus protection
efforts on smaller
marshes with
saltmarsh cordgrass.
II Saltbushes Development of Moderate Minimize or prevent
Saltmarsh Cordgrass Whitestone development impacts
through growth
management and
Best Management
Practices.
III Saltmarsh Cordgrass Residential, commercial High Preservation of all
and resort development wetlands in region
do to extraordinary
wildlife habitat
IV Big Cordgrass Bulkheads High Encourage non-
Arrow-Arum structural shoreline
Pickerelweed erosion controls.
Enforce bulkhead
standards.
V Saltmarsh Cordgrass Few Moderate New development
Black Needlerush should be carefully
Saltgrass and reviewed and Best
Saltbush Management
Practices should be
reauired.
VI Cattail, Big Cordgrass Excessive forestry sed- High Encourage increased
Arrow-Arum, iment, lack of vegetation use ofForestal BMP's
Wild rice and re-vegetation.

V. LAND MANAGEMENT AREA DELINEATION

A. INTRODUCTION

In this section, the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors are

presented with shoreline management options. The wetlands, slopes, exposed soils, and

low coastal regions create an environment highly sensitive to disturbances. The land

management area delineations are designed to protect sensitive contiguous resources

that follow a naturally occurring boundary, or are based on a rational setback policy.

While there are numerous management options, we note our reasons for reviewing three

specific policies. The maps produced in the Lancaster Countv Shoreline Management

Study Preliminarv Results 27 and in our current study have focused on identifying

27Lancaster County Shoreline Management Studv Preliminary Results, University of Virginia,
52

sensitive areas of land resources. These resources are individually mapped and include

steep slopes, poor soils, wetlands, and flood hazard areas. The resource maps were then

overlayed to identify the relative environmental sensitivity of the County. Our

methodology was based on the assumption that an area containing two or more

environmental sensitive characteristics was more vulnerable to degradation than an area

with one environmental constraint. Before discussing specific management area options,

an overview of our mapping efforts is included. Many of the maps serve several functions

by showing certain environmentally sensitive areas and delineating management area

options. The maps are included at the end of the report.

The Wetlands Maps [maps 1, 2 and 31 identify the three types of wetlands

required by the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act Draft Criteria, tidal (shown in Black),

contiguous non-tidal (Yellow) and noncontiguous non-tidal (Red). The black and yellow

areas represent the minimum components required for the Resource Conservation Zone

in the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (CBPA) Discussion Documents. However, if the

County is to comply with the "spirit" of the document, the conservation zone should also

include "... other such sensitive areas as local governments deem necessary to protect

the quality of state waters."28

On the Resource Conservation Area Maps, [maps 5, 6 and 7], areas that had two or

more sensitive resources are colored green. Our study group considers these as

sensitive areas that must be closely managed to protect the quality of state waters as well

as the environment of the County.

The Resource Management Area Map [map 81 represents a composite of all areas

possessing one or more of the resources. The areas not colored are not significantly

sensitive. Most of the County is shown as sensitive as a result of the vast amount of

shoreline and extensive system of tributaries found in Lancaster. This map illustrates

School of Architecture, Division of Urban and Environmental Planning, Spring 1988 for
the Northern Neck Planning District Commission.
28Chesateake Bav Preservation Act Criteria: Draft Discussion Document. Chesapeake Bay Local
Assistance Department, March 22, 1989, p. 6
53

that comprehensive resource management would involve protection on a county-wide3

basis.

B. 50 FOOT CONTOUR5

The boundaries of the 50 foot contour encompass a majority of the green area

presented on the resource conservation area map [see map 41. The 50 foot contour as3

the resource conservation boundary incorporates almost al of the sensitive areas

identified in our mapping and resource analysis efforts. Within this region, specific areasI

could be set aside as conservation zones. This would provide an adequate management3

area delineation which is necessary in light of the environmental sensitivity of the area.

This management option would allow for more general resource management3

initiatives in a large area and more intensive protection efforts in a smaller geographic

area. While there are many options available to the County in determining the boundariesI

of smaller conservation and/or preservation areas, the 50 foot contour provides the most3

appropriate outer shoreline management boundary. A management area based on the 50

foot contour and a conservation area extending from the shoreline to 1500 feet inland5

could be established. Such a delineation would place the County well within the letter

and intent of the Draft CBPA Criteria.I

C. 600 FOOT WATERFRONT SETBACK

The 600 foot setback, currently used as a waterfront overlay in Lancaster3

County, parallels the shoreline, creating a buffer zone of approximately one or two lots on

the waterfront. This approach recognizes the necessity of controlling activity along theI

shoreline and facilitates regulation and enforcement. However, it fails to effectively deal3

with the environmentally sensitive nature of the coastal zone.

On the Wetlands [map 31 and Resource Conservation [map 61 maps, the light blue5

line represents the 600 foot waterfront setback. This area does not protect all of the

components that the Draft CBPA Criteria or our study team have identified asI

541

environmentally critical. Many contiguous non-tidal wetlands fall outside of the 600 foot

setback. While the 600 foot setback does provide an easily identifiable management area,

its failure to provide comprehensive coverage of critical habitat and sensitive resources

suggests that it is not an appropriate selection as a regulatory zone.

D. CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION CRITERIA

The final alternative reviewed applies the Draft Preservation Act Criteria to

Lancaster County. The Local Assistance Board has established a list of watershed

components that must be managed. These criteria are divided into 3 categories, each of

which is applied to two management areas. The fist management area is classified as a

Resource Protection Area (RPA) and includes all tidal wetlands, all tidal shoreline, and

nontidal wetlands that are contiguous to tidal wetlands and/or shoreline. The discussion

document stipulates that the RPA must be surrounded by a 100 foot naturally vegetated

buffer strip.

The RPA must be bordered by a Resource Management Area (RMA). The RMA

must include floodplains, highly erodible soils, and highly permeable soils. The RMA for

Lancaster County was not mapped due to difficulties in procuring a highly erodible soils

map of appropriate scale. Therefore, the county should request a highly erodible soils

map from VirGIS in the scale of USGS quadrangle maps. With the map at such a scale,

the RMA criteria can be easily mapped.

The RMA should include the areas identified above as well as any other areas that

the County feels should be classified as "sensitive lands" to be subject to higher

performance standards than areas that are outside of a localities shoreline area. The

RMA does not have a mandatory size, however, the Local Assistance Board has indicated

that a 1500 foot zone would be the minimum that they would find acceptable for RMA

designation.

To examine the effectiveness of this RMA boundary, we placed the 1500 foot line

over the Wetlands Map [map 21 and the Resource Conservation Area [map 5]. This

management area would provide protection for tidal wetlands, a portion of the

contiguous nontidal and none of the non-contiguous nontidal wetlands. When overlayed

on the resource conservation area map. approximately half of the green area falls outside

of the 1500 foot management area. Therefore, the County's RMA should be more

inclusive than the 1500 foot zone.

E. RECOMMENDATIONS

In our judgement, there are two rational policy options to consider in delineating

the management and conservation zones within Lancaster County. We recommend

designating CBPA, as required by the Act, establishing a Conservation District which

would serve as a shoreline overlay extending 1500 feet from the water, and

establishment of a Management District with the 50 foot contour as the boundary.

Both zones should be managed with high performance standards and management

practices. We recommend that the Conservation District have a 5 acre minimum

residential lot size and a 2 acre minimum residential lot size for the Management

District. Such a shoreline management strategy would protect a majority of the sensitive

areas that have been identified through our analysis.

At a minimum, the CBPA Criteria should be adopted as delineating a Preservation

area, and the 50 foot contour should serve as a basis for a management area. This

management option would ensure compliance with the CBPA Criteria. However, such a

narrow management area would fail to protect many highly sensitive areas. The

protection of these areas is essential to protect the health, safety, and welfare of County

residents and to increase the environmental stability of Lancaster County.

VI. CONCLUSION

The objective of this report is to raise issues which are central to the

I ~~management of the Lancaster County shoreline and to suggest policies which the County
can pursue. Our recommendations are the result of considering the social, econorhic,

I ~~~environmental, and political context within which Lancaster County promulgates its land

I ~~~use regulations.

Our findings indicate that new programs and policies are needed if Lancaster

5 ~~~County is to manage its growth. To facilitate implementation of our suggestions, we have

noted potential sources of revenue amd specific areas where additional personnel are

I ~~needed. Furthermore, construction and development standards and enforcement efforts

within the shoreline area must be upgraded to adequately protect the natural

environment of Lancaster County as well as the water quality of the Chesapeake Bay.

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5

References

General

Model Subdivision Ordinance Richmond Countv Workbook. October 1988, Chesapeake |
Bay Foundation (Suite 815, Heritage Building, 1001 E. Main Street, Richmond, VA).

Planning and Growth Manazement in Virginia: A Survev of Local Practice (and Technical 1
Appendix), August 1988, Institute for Environmental Negotiation University of
Virginia, for The Virginia Council on the Environment.

Lancaster County Shoreline Management Study Preliminary Results. University of Virginia, I
Division of Urban and Environmental Planning Spring 1988 for Northern Neck
Planning District Commission.

Groundwater I

Bird, Judy Campell, March 1985, Groundwater Protection: Emergine Issues and Policv
Challenges. Environmental and Energy Study Institute.-
A Groundwater Protection Strateev for Virginia. 1987, Virginia Groundwater Protection
Steering Committee.

Hrezo, Margaret and Goldstein, Stephen, June 1986, Protecting Virginia's Groundwater: A
Guide for Local Government. I

Lancaster County Shoreline Management Studv- Preliminary Results. Spring 1988, Division
of Urban and Environmental Planning, University of Virginia.

Newton, V.P. and E. A. Siudyla, 1978, Groundwater of the Northern Neck Penisula. I
Virginia, Commonwealth of Virginia, State Water Control Board, Bureau of Water
Control Management. I

Virginia Groundwater Management Handbook- State Aaencv Proerams for Groundwater
Protection. 1988, The Virginia Groundwater Protection Steering Committee.

Virginia's Groundwater: You Can Helro Protect It, 1988, U.S. Environmental Protection I
Agency.

Waller, Roger M., 1988, Groundwater and the Rural Homeowner. U.S. Department of the
Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.
Weigmann, Dianna L. and Kroehler, Carolyn J., 1988, Threats to Virginia's Groundwater,
Virginia Water Resources Research Center, VPI and SU.

Surface Water 3

Prioritv Water Bodies Information Bulletin 576, produced by the Virginia Water Control
Board (October 1988).

Water Oualitv Management Plan, produced by the Northern Neck Planning District I
Commission (1973).

Technical data gathered from the water quality monitoring station on the Corrotoman.

Wetlands

Wetlands, James G Gosselink and William J. Mitsch, (Van Nostrand Reinhold Company,
New York), 1976.

Chesapeake Bav: Introduction to an Ecosvstem, (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), 1982.

Conserving our Wetland Resources: Avenues for Citizen Particivation An Action Handbook.
Chlesapeake Bay Foundation,

Wetlands: Their Use and Regulations. (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.),
1984.

Wetlands Guidelines," Virginia Department of Wetlands Ecology, Virginia Institute of
Marine Science, Virginia Marine Resource Commission).

Lancaster County Tidal Marsh Inventory," Special Report No. 45 in Applied Marine Science and
Ocean Engineering, Gene M. Siberhorn, (Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences), December
1973.

Lancaster County Shoreline Management Studv: Preliminary Results. University of Virginia,
Northern Neck Planning District Commission.

Best Management Practices for Shoreline Erosion Control," Virginia Soil and Water
Conservation Commission, Hill and Lee Shoreline Erosion Advisory Services, David
Lambert and B. B. Ross, Extension Assistants.

Mid-Atlantic Wetlands: A Disappearing Natural Treasure," (U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency), June 1987.

Public Access

Gloucester County Coastal Zone: Svecial Resort in ADvlied Marine Science and
Oceanozranhic Engineering. Kenneth Marsellus and Marvin Wass, (Virginia Institute
of Marine Sciences, Gloucester Point, Virginia), 1972.

1985 Tidewater Virginia Boatine Access Inventory. Virginia Department of Conservation and
Historic Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation.

Copy Sheet 5. Master Listing of the Landing Sites and Public Landing Survev Revort. Virginia
Marine Resources Commission Report on Public Landingd, February, 1985.

Water Management Options

Annual Report of the Groundwater Protectio Steering Committee 1988, Virginia Water
Control Board

DRASTIC: A Standardized System for Evaluating Ground Water Pollution Potential Usina
Hvdrozeoloeic Settings. National Well Water Association, May 1985.

Prioritv Water Bodies. Information Bulletin 576, October, 1988, Supplement to the 1988 Water
Quality Assessment Information Bulletin 575, Virginia Water Control Board.

Prioritv Water Bodv Assessment-Segment Identification and Svnovsis of Problem. September
1988, Virginia Water Control Board.

Water Conservation in Residential Development: Land-Use Techniaues. By Welford Sanders
and Charles Thurow, Planning Advisory Service Report Number 373, American
Planning Association.

Water Conservation Primer: How to save water. eneryv and money at home. Virginia Water
Control Board, Information Bulletin 528, Revised March 1981.

Handbook on Water-Savine and Wastewater-Reduction. Washington Suburban Sanitary
Commission (4017 Hamilton Street, Hyattsville, Maryland), Revised May 1976.

Water-Savinz and Waste Reduction Handbook for Avartment Residents. Washington
Suburban Sanitary Commission, Revised, September 1976.

Flood Plain

Accomack County Coastal Plan. Spring 1987, Division of Urban and Environmental Planning,
University of Virginia.

Citv of Virginia Beach: Flood Plain Ordinance

Flood Plain Management Ordinance of Lancaster County. Virginia. March 31, 1988.

Lancaster County Shoreline DeveloDment Plan Element- Preliminary Draft.Northern Neck
Planning District Commission.

Volume I Shoreline Management Outions for Virginia Coastal Localities. August, 1988,
Institute for Environmental Negotiation, University of Virginia for the Council on
the Environment.

Griggs, Gary B. and Gilchrist, John A.,1983, Geologic Hazards. Resources andEnvironmental
Planning. Wadsworth Publishing Company.

U DI ~~~~~~~~~~~~I1D~~~~~~~I1 IDI~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I~~I

U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~wo

14~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i

BelizeL r

l11.-QQQB~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ INTE

RE NO j1I] IFII

S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I2) II I I N~

!~r HAl iI~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~il

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~INN

I, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2' LIII~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1

~~~~IN

.4~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.~

DI -~~~~~~~~4

WETLANDS

BLACK I1M)AL

YE 1.1. IW NON HVD.i t14h

RED N) ON I'l:rAv 4

U GHT BLU~~a E IN-

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ lip

I ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~P

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~41II

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

REScOURCE II~
I ~~CON\SER~VATIOI~NI
I ~~AREA

r~~~~ 4'

40lt~~~~~~~~~~~~5~1

All'~~~~~~p
"Rill~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3

.1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.7 h..r h

RESOURCE3 q,
CONSERVA ION~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I I

IAREA '
L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PINK~'j[

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'or

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~It

I r~R E SOU ROE
U 01 COSIERVATh(ION $ � r' *~rI
- fl~AEAj

* ~~LIGHT BLUE -

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oewl 11

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~R~ F
I~~~~~~~~~~6

~~~~~~~~OA(' lAN4 OI I* t Rif

I~~~HT

L________ CKu