Chincoteague Reports

Accomack County Sued by Citizens Group Over Appointments to Planning Commission

Save Our Necks, an Accomack County based citizens group, has filed a law suit in the Circuit Court of Accomack County, alleging illegal conduct by the Accomack County Board of Supervisors in making appointments to the County Planning Commission over the last three years.  The complaint alleges that the Board willfully created terms of office for various commissioners outside the limitations of Virginia Law. 

The complaint also alleges improper conduct by the Board of Supervisors in setting random terms for various Planning Commission members and in asserting Supervisor’s individual rights to make district appointments when no such authority has been given to them. 

The complaint seeks the reinstatement of Planning Commissioner William Fallon of Chincoteague, who was removed from office earlier this month and replaced by James Frese. The Complaint alleges that Fallon’s removal from office after serving only two years, of what should have been a four year term, was improper.  The Complaint seeks the revocation of the Frese appointment.

ED Note:  Save Our Necks was formed in 2005 to advocate for responsible government and managed growth in Accomack County.  Save Our Necks asserts that it represents more than 2,300 taxpayers and registered voters in Accomack County from eighteen different communities and all nine electoral districts.

November 15 Meeting of the Board of Supervisors

The agenda and supporting background documents for the November 15 Accomack County Board of Supervisors may be found at this URL:

November 16 Board of Supervisors Agenda

The audio archive of meetings of the Board of Supervisors may be found at this URL:

Audio Archive of Board of Supervisors Meetings

Accomack County Comprehensive Plan Workshop September 26, 2006

Editorial Note:  Because it is an incorporated town, Chincoteague is not directly affected by the Accomack County Comprehensive Plan.   Rather, Chincoteague must prepare its own Comprehensive Plan.  The Town is currently engaged in developing its Comprehensive Plan.  The progress of that work may be followed by selecting the “Comprehensive Plan – Chincoteague” link on the sidebar of this page.   

The Planning Commission of Accomack County held two comprehensive plan workshops on September 25 at Nandua High School and on September 26, 2006 at Arcadia High School.  This report provides highlights of the September 26 workshop.

Phil Hickman, Chair of the Planning Commission convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.  Mr. James McGowan, director of Planning explained the agenda of the meeting and introduced Mr. Milton Herd, Planning Consultant of Herd Planning and Design, who led the workshop.

Attendance
All members of the Accomack County Planning Commission were present.  The following members of the Accomack County Board of Supervisors were present:  Chairman Donald L. Hart, Jr., Vice-Chairman Gregory L. Duncan, Laura Belle Gordy, Sandra Hart Mears, Wanda Thornton and Ron S. Wolff.  County Administrator Steven B. Miner was present.  The staff of the County Planning Department was on hand to facilitate the workshop. Approximately forty citizens attended the workshop.

Agenda
The workshop proceeded with strict adherence to the agenda and schedule times for activities.

7:00 pm    Welcome and Introductions
7:15 pm    Overview of the Project and Tonight’s Agenda
7:25 pm    Review 1997 Comprehensive Plan
7:45 pm    Conduct Mapping Exercise for Future Land Use in the County
8:30 pm    Group Presentations
9:10 pm     Closing Comments and Review of Next Steps
9:15 pm    Adjourn

Overview of the Project and Agenda
Strategies Initiated by the Board of Supervisors:
1.  Improve the subdivision process
2.  Amend subdivision requirements
3.  Initiate zoning amendments
4.  Update future land use plan

The county is currently engaged in strategy #4, updating the future land use plan.

What is a Comprehensive Plan?
1.  A broad general plan for the future of the county
2.  A policy guide, not a law.  The Board of Supervisors has the legal authority to interpret the comprehensive plan.
3.  The State of Virginia requires all local governments to adopt a comprehensive plan and to review it at five year intervals.

The Process of Adoption of the Comprehensive Plan
1.  The County solicits citizen input and comment
2.  The Planning Staff and Consultant provide technical assistance to the Planning Commission during development of the comprehensive plan.
3.  The Planning commission prepares a Comprehensive Plan and formally transmits it to the Board of Supervisors
4.  The Board of Supervisors reviews, refines and adopts the Comprehensive Plan

Review of 1997 Comprehensive Plan
The Accomack County Comprehensive Plan may be found online at this URL:
1997 Comprehensive Plan of Accomack County

Key Goals of the Current Comprehensive Plan Update
1.  Achieve sustainable levels of land use for future generations by creating an appropriate comprehensive plan and enabling ordinances.
2.  Achieve an open participatory process to create the comprehensive plan

2005 Goals for updating the Comprehensive Plan
1.  Preserve Local Assets
2.  Focus on what is best for the county as a whole.
3.  Preserve rural lifestyle
4.  Protect land owner rights
5.  Encourage jobs and housing for young people

Issues to consider when updating the Comprehensive Plan
1. Population growth and housing construction
2.  Potential job growth
3.  Limits and/or fragile natural resources
4.  Best farm land is often the best soils for development
5. Expansion around towns is often difficult due to soil types that do not support septic systems
6.  Lack of affordable housing
7.  Traffic on Rt. 13
8.  Need to balance growth with preservation and set priorities

Key Techniques Identified in 2005 for updating the Comprehensive Plan
1.  Concentrate development around towns (compact development)
2.  Have new development reproduce village concepts (i.e. emulate the historic villages present within the county)
3.  Make use of Planned Urban Developments (PUDs) with sewer systems.
4.  Designate growth areas with good soils for septic systems.
5.  Rezoning ONLY in accordance with updated Future Land use Map (FLM).  This task is entirely in the hands of the County Board of Supervisors.

Highlights of the 1997 Comprehensive Plan

        Summary of Goals
            1.  A strong, viable, rural community proud and supportive of its history, diversity, bountiful resources, traditional industries, and vision for the future
            2.  Safe, clean, convenient and efficient provision of community services and facilities providing for transportation, recreational opportunities, government services and disposal of wastes.
            3.  A balanced, safe, and desirable pattern of land use that protects and conserves agricultural land, forest land, groundwater, surface water, wetlands and other valuable resources, providing an excellent resource base for wildlife habitat, recreation, agriculture, seafood industries and tourism.      

Key Objectives
            1.  Conservation of unique and environmentally sensitive areas for open space, recreation and habitat protection.
            2.  Recognition of County’s rural nature, including historic resources and character of villages and towns.
            3.  Conservation of groundwater quality and quantity.
            4.  Protection of high quality surface waters and restoration of degraded water supplies to an excellent level of purity.
            5.  Establishment of a “business friendly” environment that promotes economic development that is compatible with the county’s adopted objectives and vision for the future.
            6. Thriving and growing seafood, agricultural and forest industries.
            7.  Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan through fair and effective zoning practices and well planned public facilities and services.

Basic Assumptions of the Current Planning Process
1.  Population growth will continue
2.  Market demand for recreation and housing will grow
3.  Funds for public facilities are limited
4.  A more compact development pattern would protect resources.

Mapping Exercise for Future Land Use in the County
Citizens were divided into seven working groups.  During the next forty-five minutes, each group marked up a Future Land Use Map as they thought development should occur in the county.   At the end of this exercise each group made a short presentation on their recommendations.  Some highlights of the group recommendations include:
    1.  Expand housing development around existing town and villages
    2.  Concentrate industrial development around the airport, Wallops Island and the electrical generation peaker plant in New Church
    3.  Discourage strip development along Rt. 13 such as seen near New Church
    4.  Apply Chesapeake Bay standards to all of Accomack County
    5.  Implement decentralized sewage treatment facilities throughout the County.
    6.  Limit access to Rt. 13 to improve traffic flow and safety.

Closing Comments
Planning Consultant Milton Herd remarked that the consistent theme of the groups seemed to have two components:  1) expand existing concentrations of development rather than scattering development randomly throughout the county and 2) keep development along the spine of Rt. 13 and pull development back from the sea side of the county.

Next Steps
End of November 2006 - The Planning Staff and Consultant will make recommendations to the Planning Commission.

After January 2007 – refined recommendation will be ready for the Planning Commission

March 2007 – a draft Comprehensive Plan will be ready

Adjournment
Phil Hickman, Chair of the Planning Commission, adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m.

Notes by Bill Troxler

N.B.  These notes do not constitute the public record of this meeting.  The information contained herein is offered in good faith, is presented as accurately as possible, is thought to be a complete account of the proceedings.  These notes are  intended to be a public service devoid of political commentary for those who are interested in following the civic affairs of Chincoteague Island. Notes of the meeting are recorded, transcribed and distributed by volunteers who receive no financial compensation for their efforts.

September 20 Meeting of the Board of Supervisors

The agenda and supporting background documents for the September 20  Accomack County Board of Supervisors may be found at this URL:

http://www.co.accomack.va.us/new_site_2005_07/Board%20of%20Supervisors/Agendas/Current%20Agenda/Agenda.pdf

Or you may down load the PDF file by clicking on this link:

Download 92006_agenda.pdf

An article in the Eastern Shore News provides additional background information on the issue of the County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan.  The article may be found at this URL:

http://www.delmarvanow.com/easternshore/stories/20060920/2329944.html

August 16 Meeting of the Board of Supervisors – Highlights

The Accomack County Board of Supervisors met at 4 p.m. on August 16 for their regular monthly meeting.  This report covers only those portions of the Board’s agenda that may be of interest to resident and property owners on Chincoteague.  For full account of the meeting please refer to the minutes that will ultimately be approved by the Board.

Meals Tax Referendum
The Board discussed the forthcoming referendum on whether or not Accomack County should institute a tax on meals and prepared foods.  There was animated discussion among the Board members and with staff over how much revenue the tax may generate, how much administration of the tax would cost and how much enforcement of the tax ordinance would cost.

Staff reported that originally they estimated the tax would generate $430,000 in annual revenue.  However when they adjusted their model to leave out restaurants, convenience stores and grocery store delis that are located within incorporated towns, the revenue estimate fell to $250,000 per year.

On a 5 to 4 vote, the Board passed a resolution instructing staff to prepare estimates on the costs of administration and enforcement.

Supervisor Wolff reported that he had requested an association of Virginia restaurateurs to provide data on who uses restaurants, how often they eat out and how much, on average they spent.  He offered this information for Virginia.

** The average citizen eats out 4.2 times per week
** The average purchase ranges from $4.35 at a fast food restaurant to $28.30 at an upscale    restaurant. 
**77% of restaurant sales are to local customers
** For every dollar spent on food 50% is spent in restaurants.
** Virginia cities have the five highest meals taxes of any cities in the U.S.A.  The average meals tax in Virginia is 11.5%

Highway Matters
The highway department continues to negotiate for rights-of-way from two property owners at the intersection of Rt. 175 and Rt. 679 in Wattsville.  In June of 2001 the intersection was certified as requiring a stop light.

Ms. Thorton expressed her gratitude to the Highway Department for their prompt attention to the Chincoteague swing bridge during the recent heat wave.  She reported that on two occasions the bridge was unable to close because of the effects of the heat.  The highway department responded quickly and solved the problem both times.

Schools
Mr. Bull, Superintendent of Schools reported that Chincoteague High School will be ready for students when the school year begins immediately after Labor Day. 

Property Value Reassessment
Tri-County Appraisals, Inc. provided an update on the county new property value reassessment program.  The most significant goal of the program is to equalize property values throughout the county.  The State Department of Taxation considers a good level of equalization to be 10%.  That is to say the assessment of a property is neither 5% above nor 5% below market value.  The current equalization rate in Accomack County is 60%.  That is to say that property assessments range from 30% above to 30% below current market value. 

Tri-County reported that they expect a typical property assessed at $75,000 will be assessed at $202,500 when the work is completed. 

A copy of the Tri-County report is available at this link:

Download reassement_report_accomack_neighborhoods.pdf

A copy of the reassement handbook is available at this link:

Download real_estate_assessment_accomack_county.pdf

Planning Department
Wal-Mart has submitted a Conditional Use Permit application to develop a Wal-Mart Supercenter on Route 13 in Onley.  The Department is currently reviewing the application for completeness.  Wal-Mart held two information meetings with local residents on August 10.

Hazard Mitigation Plan
The Board considered a resolution to approve the Eastern Shore Hazard Mitigation Plan updated in June 2006.  A copy of the plan is available through the following link:

Download hazard_mitigation_plann_june_2006.pdf   

This 133 page document is a PDF file that is 12.2 MB in size.  Chapter 1 describes the hazards on the shore.  Chapter 2 describes the risks facing the shore and states probabilities of occurrences and ranks the risks on a scale of priority hazard.

Highlights prepared by Bill Troxler

N.B.  These notes do not constitute the public record of this meeting.  The information contained herein is offered in good faith, is presented as accurately as possible, is thought to be a complete account of the proceedings.  These notes are  intended to be a public service devoid of political commentary for those who are interested in following the civic affairs of Chincoteague Island. Notes of the meeting are recorded, transcribed and distributed by volunteers who receive no financial compensation for their efforts.

July 19, 2006 Meeting of the Accomack County Board of Supervisors

The Accomack County Board of Supervisors met at 4:00 p.m. in Metompkin Elementary School to conduct their regular monthly meeting. 

These notes contains contain highlights of agenda items that are of interest to residents and property owners of Chincoteague.

The complete agenda and background materials can be found on the County website at this address:
http://www.esva.net/~accomack/new_site_2005_07/Board%20of%20Supervisors/Agendas/Current%20Agenda/Agenda.pdf

A copy of the PDF of the agenda can be viewed by clicking on this link:  Download july_06_supervisors_agenda.pdf

Agenda Item 8 Highway Matters
A.  Repair to the Island side of the drawbridge abutment will be completed by the end of July 20.

B.  In 2001 the Virginia Department of Transportation authorized the installation of a traffic control signal at the intersection of Rt. 175 and Rt. 679 in Wattsville.  However, it has been determined that the right-of-way is insufficient to accommodate a traffic signal.  Negotiations are ongoing to acquire sufficient right-of-way to allow construction to proceed.

Agenda Item 9. b. Report of the Superintendent of Public Schools
Mr. W. Richard Bull reported that construction of Chincoteague High School is on schedule.  The work will be completed in late August.  All the teaching spaces have been finished.  The cafeteria and offices remain under construction.

Agenda Item 9. c. Report of the Planning Department
Mr. James. M McGowan, Director of Planning for Accomack County announced that the first workshops on the update of the Accomack County Comprehensive Plan for Land Use and Zoning will occur September 25 and 26.  These will likely be scheduled at either Arcadia or Nandu High School.

The open session business meeting recessed at 5:30 p. m. 

A public hearing began at 7:30 p.m. to hear testimony on a proposed amendment to the county codes pertaining to “Dangerous and Vicious Dogs” and “Impoundment, Rabies Control.”

Notes by Bill Troxler

N.B.  These notes do not constitute the public record of this meeting.  The information contained herein is offered in good faith, is presented as accurately as possible, is thought to be a complete account of the proceedings.  These notes are intended to be a public service devoid of political commentary for those who are interested in following the civic affairs of Chincoteague Island. Notes of the meeting are recorded, transcribed and distributed by volunteers who receive no financial compensation for their efforts.

June 28, 2006 Joint Hearing and Vote on Iterim Zoning Ordinance

At 7:30 p.m. in the auditorium of Nandua High School in Onley, Virginia the Accomack County Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive public comment on the proposed Interim Zoning Ordinance.  All members of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors were in attendance for the public hearing.

The auditorium was filled with citizens.  The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors reported that one hundred twenty citizens had signed up to speak.   Each speaker was limited to a three minute presentation. 

Previous posts have presented the details of the proposed Interim Zoning Ordinance.  The basic proposal was to change the zoning ordinance for agriculturally zoned land to limit subdivision of agriculturally zoned parcels to one house on ten acres of land with the option of clustering smaller lots while reserving a large portion of the parcel for farming, forestry or open space.  For greater detail on this complex matter please refer to earlier posts.

A rough count of citizen-speakers’ recommendations indicated a nearly even split for and against the proposed Interim Zoning Ordinance.

Summary of Outcomes
At the conclusion of the public hearing the following actions were taken:

1.  On a vote of 5 ayes and 3 nays, the Planning Commission voted to adopt the Interim Zoning Ordinance and thereby recommend it to the Board of Supervisors for enactment.

2.  The Board of Supervisors altered the Planning Commission’s recommendation to provide for one house in FIVE acres.  This motion carried on 7 ayes and 2 nays. 

3. The Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to instruct the Planning Commission to deliver its final recommended Comprehensive Zoning and Land Use Plan within eighteen months.

4. The Board of Supervisors voted to allow all subdivision applications received by the County prior to the adoption of the one house in five acres ordinance to proceed through review under the terms of the former ordinance.

Some Details of the Public Hearing and Actions of the Political Bodies

Planning Consultant Updated Limits on Housing
The Accomack County Office of Planning had previously printed in a newspaper advertisement that if all agriculturally zoned land were to be subdivided into residential lots, the result would be 160,000 building lots.  This was only one model developed by the planning consultant.  When the adequacy of soils for building and septic was considered, this figure dropped to 114,000.  The model used predicted build out of these lots over a twenty-three year period.  Another, more realistic model that incorporated actual population trends suggests that, without altering the zoning ordinance, the County should anticipate that 23,000 homes would be developed on agricultural land during the next fourteen years.

Sample of Issues Raised by Citizen Speakers
These two lists are not exhaustive reports of every statement or every category of statement made.  These samples are offered to provide some understanding of how the pro and con speakers reacted to the proposed interim zoning ordinance.

Sample of PRO Speakers Comments

* Without the ordinance the fragile environment of the bays will degrade and aquaculture will be    threatened.

* Dividing farm land into housing will destroy the major industry of the county.

* Property taxes will rise dramatically because of the demand for public services generated by new housing.

* The only winners under the current zoning are the profiteering developers who take the money and run.
*The proposal is interim.  The county needs time to put in place adequate zoning to protect citizens from unchecked development.

* The increased demand for water created by unrestrained development will over-tax the ground water resource that supports all residents and farms.  The aquifer will degrade because of salt water intrusion.

* The proposed zoning ordinance is not nearly as restrictive as the one house on twenty
acres currently in place in Northampton County to the south and Worcester County to the north of Accomack County.

Sample of CON Speakers Comments
* The zoning ordinance is a violation of the guarantee of private property rights made in the Constitution of the United States.

* Land is the 401k retirement plan of the farmer.  Devaluating the land by a down zoning is a taking of value without compensation to the farmer.

* The zoning ordinance is hardest on the poor.  It diminishes the stock of “affordable housing.”

* Devaluating the land through the zoning changes means that farmers have less collateral to use as collateral for bank loans which fund their operating and capital expenses.

* There is no such thing as “interim” legislation.  Once on the books it stays on the   books.  If the proposal is passed, it will be permanent.

* The proposal will drive young people out of the county and off the shore because they will not be able to afford a house on a ten acre lot.

* The procedure by which the zoning ordinance was developed did not follow the rules.  Steps were skipped.  The process needs to be scrapped, restarted and done properly.

Discussion by Members of the Planning Commission
Prior to voting on the proposed Interim Zoning Ordinance some members of the planning commission discussed their votes.

Members in favor of the proposal cited the need to put the brakes on development until a proper zoning ordinance could be drafted.  Those opposed commented on the complexity of the ordinance and the harm it might bring to low income people in the county.

Following the five to three vote to adopt the Interim Zoning Ordinance the Planning Commission adjourned.

Discussion by the County Board of Supervisors
The Board of Supervisors took up the Planning Commission’s recommendation to enact the Interim Zoning Ordinance. The course of events leading to the eventual enactment of the one house on five acres is reported in the following.

1. A motion to adopt the recommendation of the planning commission for one house on ten acres FAILED by a vote of 6 nays to 3 ayes.

2.  Supervisor Cropper moved to amend the Planning Commission Report to one house on one acre. The motion FAILED by a vote 7 nays to 2 ayes.

3.  Supervisor Mallet moved to amend the Planning Commission Report to one house on seven acres.  The motion FAILED by a vote 6 nays to 3 ayes.

4.  Supervisor Gordy moved to amend the Planning Commission Report to one house on three acres. The motion FAILED by a vote 7 nays to 2 ayes.  During the discussion of this motion, Supervisor Thornton sought to eliminate the requirement that the acreage of tidal and non-tidal wetlands on a parcel be deducted from the total acreage of the parcel before calculating the number of lots that would be permitted on the parcel.

5.  Supervisor Duncan moved to amend the Planning Commission Report to one house on five acres. The motion PASSED by a vote 7 ayes to 2 nays.

With little discussion the Supervisors adopted a resolution to require the Planning Commission to deliver its recommended update of the Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Plan within eighteen months.

Much discussion followed about how to treat those subdivision applications that have been received by the County Office of Planning.  It was determined that any subdivision application received by the County at the close of business on June 28 would be treated under the terms of the zoning ordinance before adoption of the Interim Zoning Ordinance.

The final action of Board of Supervisors was initiated by Supervisor Wanda Thornton.  She stated that there had been much mis-information presented during the evening and read into the record the U.S Census data stating the population of Accomack County at the time of the 2000 census.  Then she stated for the record that she believed that the Office of Planning had done a poor and misleading job of conveying information to the public about the proposed Interim Zoning Ordinance.  Her comments were directed specifically at Mr. James McGowan, Director of Planning.  She wished her criticism to be a matter of public record.

The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 1:20 a.m.

Notes transcribed by Bill Troxler

N.B.  These notes do not constitute the public record of this meeting.  The information contained herein is offered in good faith, is presented as accurately as possible, is thought to be a complete account of the proceedings.  These notes are  intended to be a public service devoid of political commentary for those who are interested in following the activities of Chincoteague Government. Notes of the meeting are recorded, transcribed and distributed by volunteers who receive no financial compensation for their efforts.

Interim Zoning Ordiance Hearing June 28,2006

Interim Zoning Ordinance
Public Information Session 7 p.m.
Public Hearing 7:30 p.m.
June 28, 2006
Nandua High School
Onley, Virginia

The Accomack County Board of Supervisors and the Accomack County Planning Commission will hold a joint public hearing on Wednesday June 28, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. to consider a proposed amendment to the County Zoning Ordinance.

The following data were derived from these sources:  1) two advertisements placed in the Eastern Shore News by the Accomack Department of Planning, 2) analysis of the budget and land records of Accomack County by the citizens group Save Our Necks (www.saveournecks.com) and 3) other independent examinations of public data

Why Is This Change to the Zoning Ordinance Being Proposed?
Source: Save Our Necks
During the period from 2000 through 2003 a cumulative total of 130 lots were authorized for housing development in Accomack County.  During 2004 and 2005, the County authorized 1,697 lots for housing development.  The increase in authorized housing development between these two periods is roughly 1,300%.  Most of this new subdivision activity has been on land currently zoned for agricultural use.  More than 90% of the land in Accomack County is zoned for agricultural use. 

What New Requirements Would this Proposed Change to the Zoning Ordinance Impose?
Source:  Accomack County Department of Planning

1.  The minimum lot size would be increased from 30,000 square feet (0.68 acres) to ten acres unless the subdivision made use of “clustering.”

2.  A “clustered” lot is a residential building lot within a cluster development that is smaller than the minimum lot size.  This permits the remainder of the property to be used for agriculture, forestry or open space.  The minimum lot size of a cluster lot is 30,000 square feet.  The maximum lot size of a cluster lot is one acre.

3.  Two additional “bonus” lots are allowed per parcel if the subdivision is a cluster design and the remainder lot of the subdivision is greater than one acre.  Bonus lots are allowed on parcels of less than ten acres if the lots are clustered.  The remainder lot in a parcel cannot be further subdivided.

4.  Family Subdivisions have a minimum lot size of 30,000 square feet.  Sales may be to immediate family members only.  Lots created as “Family Subdivisions” cannot be sold until
three years after the initial gift or sale.  Family Subdivision lots are in addition to lots allowed by-right under the zoning ordinance.

5.  Tidal and non-tidal wetlands on a parcel are subtracted from the total land area before any calculation is made of the number allowable lots.

How Many Houses Can be Built in a Clustered Subdivision?
Source:  Accomack County Department of Planning

Parcel Size   # of Regular Lots    OR       # of Cluster Lots    AND     Remainder Lot

2.5 acres      one 2.5 acre lot      or        two cluster lots     and       1.1 acre
5 acres        one 5 acre lot         or       two cluster lots       and      3 acres
10 acres       one 10 acre lot       or        two cluster lots      and       8 acres
50 acres       five 10 acre lots      or        six cluster lots         and     44 acres
100 acres     ten 10 acre lots       or        eleven cluster lots  and       89 acres

How Many Lots Could be Created Under Existing Zoning?
Source:  Accomack County Department of Planning
Without any change to the zoning ordinance, if all the land that is currently zoned Agricultural in Accomack County and which also has adequate soils for septic systems was subdivided, approximately 160,000 new 30,000 square foot lots would be created. 

What Land is Affected by the Proposed Change?
Source:  Accomack County Department of Planning
Only land zoned for agricultural use is affected by the proposed change. Incorporated towns, such as Chincoteague, are not affected by the proposed ordinance.  Accomack County has fourteen incorporated towns.  None of these would be affected by the proposed change.

What Are the Legal Strictures Under Which the County Operates?
Source:  Accomack County Department of Planning
Virginia law requires local government to approve subdivision applications if they meet the minimum lot size requirements of the zoning district and the requirements of the subdivision ordinance. 

Accomack county may not turn down a subdivision application that meets the zoning lot size and subdivision ordinance requirements even if the existing state roads are substandard and unsafe, or if fire and rescue service in the area is inadequate, or if the new subdivision will impact nearby farmland and poultry operations, or if the subdivision will pollute nearby waters and shellfish beds, or if the subdivision will cause ground water impacts including saltwater intrusion. 

Accomack County can manage the impacts of growth through its rezoning process.  However, unless the minimum lot size is increased in the agricultural district, developers have no reason to seek rezoning.  Without the interim zoning issue, the county has no tool with which to manage its growth.

What Positions Do The County Supervisors Hold on the Proposal?
Members of the Board of Supervisors hold mixed views on the proposed interim zoning ordinance.  Some appear to oppose any change.  Some want to get on with other business. Others support changes that span a range of limits from one house on three acres through one house on seven acres to one house in ten acres.  The outcome of consideration of the proposed interim zoning ordinance is uncertain.

County Supervisor Wanda Thornton (Chincoteague) has made clear that she opposes the proposed interim zoning ordinance as currently written. She believes that the interim zoning ordinance strips property owners of their rights and will have the effect of diminishing the value of land zoned for agricultural use.  She is also concerned about the lack of affordable housing in the county and believes that increasing the minimum lot size will make matters worse.

What is the Process by Which the Interim Zoning Ordinance is Approved or Rejected?
An up or down vote may occur on Wednesday night after the public hearing concludes.  Some effort may be made to delay the process for “further study.”   No one seems able to count the votes and make a judgment on what will happen or when closure on the issue may occur.

Notes Transcribed by Bill Troxler

Building and Zoning

Building, Planning and Zoning
Accomack County
23296 Courthouse Ave.
Accomac, Virginia 23301

Director:
David A. Fluhart
bpz@co.accomack.va.us