The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element exists to establish the County-wide vision and guide for development and corresponding land uses and land use intensity considerate of numerous factors including but not limited to: land use interactions and transitions, transportation systems, population trends, provision of housing, economic development efforts, historic and environmental resources. Maintenance of the Future Land Use Element within the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the Code of Virginia Sect. 15.2-2223 (attached for reference). As per the existing 2013 Comprehensive Plan (last updated in May, 2018), “Land use designations on the Future Land Use Map do not change a parcel’s zoning classification, nor do they impact continuation of existing legal land uses or other uses permitted by existing zoning.” The land use element and its corresponding policies are consulted as part of Comprehensive Plan analysis’ associated with rezoning and special use permit application reviews involving a public hearing process. The land use element serves as a guide to help determine whether such proposals positively contribute to the established land use vision or may conflict with it.

The Future Land Use Element and corresponding mapped land use designations have their origin in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Both were reviewed and updated as part of the 2013 Comprehensive Plan update in conjunction with input from County Citizens, efforts of the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Group, Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. The County has tracked actively in review and approved rezoning activities going back to March, 2009 (See attached Rezoning Activity map for reference).  The rezoning activity map identifies rezoning project sites in relation to the future land use map designations of their surroundings. Overall rezoning activity has been consistent with the corresponding land use designation and their descriptions. Denser development (including mixed use projects) can be found within the Primary Development Boundary, and rural large lot rezoning activity can be found around the periphery of the Primary Development Boundary and in the Lake Anna area. From a Land Use perspective, consistency with land use designation and their intended uses as described has not left all projects without controversy or concern however.  Through project review there are efforts made to identify and mitigate impacts as much as possible, however over the course of time it appears there may be added value in providing greater depth and vision concerning land use designations and how they interact with one another physically, especially considering newly proposed development adjacent to existing development and density transitions. Another major concern involves the mixed use areas and how they are intended to develop and their ultimate development mix upon build-out, and how and when various phases and uses will build-out. A number of large mixed use projects have been approved with an extensive array of proposed uses but appear to be one dimensional residential projects, especially during initial phasing. Concerns about overbuilt commercial without adequate “rooftops” to support are a legitimate concern locally. Staff would like to avoid advocating for the construction of commercial space if its inevitably going to be vacant, leading to long term concerns about financial sustainability of such properties, vacancy, abandonment, deferred maintenance, etc. Staff would like to consider introducing a tiered approach for mixed use and employment center areas specifically where primary and subordinate land uses can clearly be identified and envisioned. In this way, residential may be limited as subordinate in intended Commercial and office core areas of mixed use areas, preserving developable acreage for non-residential development. Peripheral mixed use areas, or areas located off main transportation corridors may be best suited for residential as a primary use with commercial subordinate.  The City of Richmond draft land use plan includes a table of tiered land uses (attached for reference). Instead of a “broad brush” one size fits all land use designation for mixed use, the draft Richmond model identifies varying degrees of mixed use and suggests their intended development pattern (uses and intensity). A Spotsylvania County version of this need not carry the level of detail as described in the Richmond example and leave the zoning ordinance to establish building heights, parking, etc. Additionally, staff acknowledges Spotsylvania County is not the City of Richmond and the size and scale of land use descriptions would likely differ. However, a Spotsylvania version could help identify the intended uses and intensity while identifying complementary zoning designations that would “fit” that vision. Upon rezoning, the zoning ordinance and design standards manual would regulate development specifics like height and parking.

Creation of a clearer land use vision is expected to occur with a greater emphasis placed on economic development efforts and opportunities. Planning and Economic Development staff have already started reviewing a variety of areas throughout the County in an effort to ensure land use designations are better positioned “on the pulse” of economic development trends and opportunities. The goal is to reduce land use conflict and loss of land that may be better suited for alternative uses.

Staff has identified a number of considerations for the land use element update, as follows:

• Identify zoning designations that may complement the intent of the corresponding land use designation;
• Provide greater parity between area based land use designations, their intended development, and Economic Development Zones (Tourism Zone, Technology Zone, HUB Zone, Opportunity Zones, etc.);
• Note Virginia scenic byways (River Road, Guinea Station Road) within the County with land use insights and corridor proximate design considerations complementary to those designations;
• Expand open space land use designations to include added conservation lands since last update (ex. DGIF Oakley Plantation) and sensitive wetlands and resource protection areas throughout the County;
• Reduce transitional density conflicts between proposed and existing developments (with similar land uses) via vegetative screening/buffer that can also establish or preserve wildlife corridors throughout the County;
• Clearly acknowledge the importance of utility, internet connectivity, and telecommunications networks throughout the County. In order to effectively provide service coverage, such infrastructure must bridge land use designations;
• Remove dark sky lighting policy. Outdoor lighting is now effectively addressed county-wide through the Zoning ordinance;
• Scale back Institutional Land Use designation to apply only to governmental operations. This designation is not forward looking and reflects existing land uses
• Institutional land uses such as churches, country clubs, private golf courses are not governmentally owned or managed, land and proposed use can change, difficult to track and comprehensively reflect (place of worship inside a commercial retail strip)
• Consider assigning Agricultural/Forestal Land Use areas to include designated Agricultural/Forestal districts, PDR sites, and areas outside of the PDB identified by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation’s Virginia Agricultural Model, Forest Conservation Values for very high or outstanding value;
• Aside from by-right potential, proliferation of rural residential subdivisions, development for non-agricultural or forestal uses, or further fragmentation of large rural lots would be discouraged in these areas;
• Consider adding a land use overlay in Rural Residential areas considerate of Ecological Cores of Very High to Outstanding Value identified by the Virginia Natural Landscape Assessment. These areas would be considered valuable candidates for land and environmental conservation efforts, cluster development, preservation of natural areas;
• For all land uses outside of the Primary Development Boundary, establish County policy to secure groundwater hydrology studies for development proposals increasing density or intensity of development via rezoning or special use permit;
• Remove open space preservation percentages identified in agricultural and forestal land use and residential land use policies. The County zoning ordinance establishes open space requirements and cluster provisions are option;
• Add major electric corridors map to the Element consistent with the Code of Virginia;
• Consider Mixed Land Use tiers based on intended intensity (transect-type model) with greater description and visioning detailed for various mixed use areas (Lake Anna vs Thornburg vs Exit 126 vs Lafayette Blvd area infill);
• Provide greater detail regarding infill mixed use areas such as the Lafayette Blvd area;
• Infill mixed use may entail designating commercial corridors and lower intensity residential areas off the “main drag”;
• Consider designating employment center tiers. Presently “broad brush” employment centers range from warehousing and manufacturing facilities, recycling centers, flex space industrial parks to office parks;
• Consider providing greater description of intended uses and intensity within different employment center areas (for instance aside from agriculture, forestry or mining, logistics heavy operations may be more appropriate in close proximity to I-95, Rt 2 & 17 and RF&P Rail versus a site well inland);
• Aside from the Crossroads Mixed Use area paired with the VRE station, protect and promote employment center type development along the rail corridor;
• Protect and promote expansion of industrially zoned acres, especially within employment center designated areas;
• Expand commercial or a commercial and employment center hybrid land use designation to the Caroline County line along the Rt 1 corridor outside of the Primary Development Boundary
• Proactively seek to improve development health, safety, welfare provisions through added goals and strategies;
• Dry hydrants, water collection cisterns outside the PDB, power generation backup systems for critical facilities, emergency management plans associated with high risk facilities;
• Discourage development footprints within dam break inundation areas.

The future land use map is an integral part of the future land use element and in addition to identifying land use categories for various areas within the County, it establishes the County Primary Development Boundary, guiding the provision of public utility (water and sewer) infrastructure reach in the County. Per the existing Comprehensive Plan:

Land within the boundary is intended to develop with higher residential densities and more intensive non-residential uses than outside of the boundary. By maintaining the Primary Development Boundary, the County encourages the most efficient use of the land while preserving the rural character and agricultural viability of those portions of the County outside the boundary. This boundary is not permanent and may be adjusted when conditions warrant through the amendment process…

As part of this update cycle, staff has received a number of requests from citizens and/or landowners seeking Primary Development Boundary expansions to enable eventual provision of public water and sewer service. Such changes inevitably drive up the development potential of such areas for added density or more intensive land uses. Requests received thus far have generally “hugged” the existing Primary Development Boundary, east of Massaponax Church Road. There are additional requests in the Five Mile Road area just north of Route 3. Staff is also looking at opportunities to “clean-up” the existing boundary in the Five Mile Road area where existing development, approved development, zoning designations, and topography are favorable for the expansion of sewer services and the resulting build-out of the area is much more consistent with the character of the PDB than areas outside of it. Staff is still working with the County utilities department to determine areas where expansion may be feasible and will present at a future work session focused on the PDB. Favorable topography and distance to existing infrastructure and the ability to gravity feed sewer from the proposed expansion areas into the existing Primary Development Boundary are expected to be the only scenario where County utility and Planning staff would be supportive of expansion at this time. The effect of any expansion would complement Primary Development Policy 1.a. within the Future Land Use Element that provides the ability via exception to extend utilities beyond the limits of the Primary Development Boundary in cases where topography is favorable and a new pump station would not be required. “Cleaning-up” the boundary in certain areas would effectively eliminate the need for the Policy exception referenced in the Policy. Otherwise staff does not see a strong need to further expand the Primary Development Boundary. In August, 2018 at work session with the Planning Commission, staff found that roughly 1/3^rd (13,426 acres) of the existing Primary Development Boundary remained in vacant and/or underdeveloped status. The PDB was last expanded as part of the 2013 Comprehensive Plan update, adding more than 3,000 acres. Per the Planning Department’s Future Development analysis spreadsheet, county-wide there is an inventory of over 13,000 approved and yet unbuilt residential units including single family detached, attached, multi-family, age restricted. The vast majority of these future units are located within the Primary Development Boundary. There are significant areas intended for commercial, employment center, and mixed use development that remain undeveloped at this time. The Jackson Gateway area of the County that has historically been intended as an employment hub and economic development driver is still in early stages of development. Simply, the existing Primary Development Boundary is not “bursting at the seams” to warrant any expansion beyond minor expansions that may “clean-up” the boundary and/or have favorable topography.

Staff intends to return to the Planning Commission at a later date to focus on the Primary Development Boundary.