Technical Report No. 12

    Relative to the rest of the County, the Cheat Lake Area is wealthy, has fewer households below the poverty line, has a much higher percentage of children, and a lower percentage of elderly.

    In terms of future growth, the number of housing units in the Cheat Lake Area is expected to increase by 42% during the next 25 years (housing units in the City of Morgantown are expected to increase by 6%). The population of the area is expected to increase to between 13,000 and 13,800 during this same period (between 40% and 49% growth). The percent increase in job growth is difficult to pin down, but estimates range from 77% to 343% during the next 25 years. Job growth in the Cheat Lake Area is expected to be fueled, in part, by the construction of the Mon-Fayette Transportation Project, which will link the Cheat Lake Area directly to Uniontown and Pittsburgh.

    The area is characterized by low-density development. An analysis of existing land uses revealed that land in the area is 39% farmland (active or inactive), 29% single-family residential, 18% vacant, 4% private recreational (mostly golf courses), 3% public land (a section of Coopers Rock State Forest), and the remaining 7% is comprised of a wide variety of other uses. Less than 1% of land is comprised of commercial or office uses. Relatedly, the Cheat Lake Area has only 7.9 businesses per 1,000 residents, whereas the City of Morgantown has 309 businesses per 1,000 residents. In terms of property taxes, singlefamily residential land comprises 75% of the total taxed value of land (in the core area of Cheat Lake).

    Significant development issues in the Cheat Lake Area include the construction of the Mon-Fayette expressway, and the relationship between developable land and future land needs. An extensive environmental impact assessment of the Mon-Fayette Expressway revealed that, in the area surrounding the two new interchanges, there most likely will be significant increases in residential and commercial land uses, and significant decreases in forests and rangelands. The economic impact of the project is difficult to assess, but the proliferation of highway-related land uses, such as convenience stores and fast food establishments, is highly likely.

    It is estimated that future population growth in the area may require between 785 and 878 acres of land to accommodate new residential development. A residential buildout analysis, in which future land needs were evaluated relative to available land, revealed the following:

    If development is restricted to vacant land serviced by public sewer systems, and within one-quarter mile of an existing road, only 55 acres of land are currently available.

    If development is restricted only to vacant land within one-quarter mile of an existing road, regardless of its proximity to sewer lines, there are approximately 2,128 acres of land in the Cheat Lake Area.

    If development is restricted to a particular growth corridor (i.e., the area around Interstate 68 which currently has the greatest concentration of development), and some assumptions are made regarding the capacity of existing residential land, vacant land, and agricultural land, 900 acres are available for development.

    Thus, if development is confined to the current core area of Cheat Lake, all vacant and agricultural land would have to be consumed (in addition to adding to the current capacity of single-family residential areas) in order to accommodate anticipated residential growth during the next 25 years. Commercial land area is expected to require fewer than 125 acres, and can probably be accommodated in areas along existing and proposed (i.e., Mon-Fayette expressway) transportation corridors. Still, the loss of agricultural and vacant land to commercial expansion could have significant detrimental impacts to local residents if left unchecked.

    Cheat Lake Area residents need to consider how much growth the area can reasonably sustain. Several issues need to be considered. First, new development does not always result in a net increase in jobs or tax revenues, but may instead move jobs and tax revenue from one location to another within the same region. New development that is appropriately sized for the area, that fits in well with its surroundings, and that respects the natural environment make good economic sense. In terms of services in the area, commercial, recreational, and other non-residential land use developments have not kept pace with residential growth in the Cheat Lake Area. The impact of new development on existing roadways and other utilities should not be ignored.

    The main question which Cheat Lake Area residents need to address is: how should these rapid changes in the Cheat Lake Area be dealt with? How will the quality of life in the area be impacted by these changes over the next twenty years? Does something need to be done to address these changes, or is it acceptable to let market forces and private interests "happen as they may", without regard to their potential impact?

    The purpose of this document is to give a solid grounding to discussions about the future direction of the Area. Currently, there are a wealth of opinions, but very documentation, about the current direction of change in the area. When residents talk about "booming" growth, just what does that mean, how is it different from the rest of the region, and what are the long-term projections? What will the impact of the expressway be? How much potential is there for new development? What problems could potentially occur as a result of expansion, both as a result of the new expressway as well as "natural" growth? To what degree are Cheat Lake Area residents lacking in services, both commercial and public? Given certain environmental constraints, how much room is there to accommodate new growth? This document seeks answers to these questions.

    This document is not a "plan". Instead, it is a preliminary assessment of some of the growth patterns, land use characteristics, and development issues that the Cheat Lake Area is facing or is likely to face in the future. This may be thought of as the "fact" component of a three part approach to dealing with community change. Typically, communities seeking to take control of their own destinies formulate a policy framework consisting of facts, values, and policies. The logical next step for the Cheat Lake community will be to determine their values and, ultimately, translate these values into specific policies. If this facVvalue/policy framework is in place, communities can take control of their own agenda, focusing on longrange objectives, and ultimately producing a higher quality of life for their residents.
 

    Development in the Cheat Lake area began to increase rapidly following the discovery of iron during the 1790's. By 1798 construction of the first iron furnace, the Davis furnace, had been completed. In 1825 a second iron works, the Woodgrove furnace was completed. By this time the area's population had grown to approximately 3,000. A majority of these settlers lived along the edge of the river on land that was later submerged following completion of the Cheat Lake dam in 1926. Aside from the iron works, other commercial and manufacturing sites included a sawmill, gristmill, nail mill, and an oven casting works that was part of one iron works. Charcoal production, which was vital to iron making at the time, was another large local commercial enterprise.

    In addition to these revenue generating endeavors the area received an influx of through traffic from settlers moving toward points west and south. A number of ferries, including Ices Ferry, named for Andrew Ice, were established along the river to service the local residents as well as those passing through. Cheat River or Ices Ferry (commonly associated names for the settlement at that time) had developed into a bustling community by the mid-1800's. By this time the area was dotted with churches, retail stores, hotels, such as the Oaks and Mont Chateau Lodge, and drinking establishments. Also a fairgrounds that had been established on Grassy Island, located to the east of the Ices Ferry, drew visitors from as far as 50 miles away. Adding to this development, another iron furnace was built in the mid-1830's around which a community of 300 to 400 people grew. This was followed by the Henry Clay furnace, established in 1836 and the Anna (named for Anna Ellicott, a relation of Evan Ellicott) furnace, in 1840 which was the last iron works to operate in Union district, within which Cheat River was located.

    By the late 1840's the area's share of the iron market began to decrease. As a result, a majority of the property now known as Cooper's Rock State Forest had become tax delinquent property and Preston county portions of it were put up for sale at the county courthouse. The Smyth and Chess families purchased this property and between 1871 and 1911 the land remained dormant. During this period farming replaced iron making as the primary land use in the Cheat River area as what was once a bustling industrial center was transformed into a farming community. The Smyth and Chess property was subsequently sold to Kendall Lumber Company which harvested timber from the area until 1928 when it went bankrupt. Timbering in the area had occurred since its early settlement but began to dwindle following the closing of area's iron works.

    The damming of the Cheat River and subsequent creation of the Cheat Lake by West Penn Power Company began in the years between 1911 and 1913. According to local historian Carvell, support for and opposition to the project by local residents was split "fiftyfifty". Opposition was so strong that the company was unable to condemn more than 50% of the land needed to complete the project and work on it ceased in 1915. However, a Mr. Albert Lynn assumed leadership of West Penn Power in 1921 and placed completion of the stalled project as one of the company's top priorities. By 1926 the dam was finished and the lake was filled. While the resulting lake was officially named Lake Lynn by West Penn Power, residents referred to it as Cheat Lake in protest and the name stuck. Bottom land, along which many residents lived, and the Grassy Island were submerged upon completion of the dam. This markedly changed the area's land use pattern.

    While the area continued to experience a degree of development and an influx of new residents, it was not until the 1970's that Cheat Lake residents had direct access to the interstate highway system. Access to the northeastern side of the lake development was rather restricted prior to building the Ices Ferry Bridge. This translated into very low levels of development in the area throughout most of the 1900's. Donna Roberts, a 49 year resident of Cheat Canyon Park recalled that in 1948, with the in-migration of Gls into the Morgantown area following World War II, it was not possible to find living space within the city limits. Yet in the Cheat Lake area during that same year only a handful of summer cottages and permanent residences dotted the landscape.

    In response to a question regarding his choice to relocate to the area in the late 1960's, Robert Dinsmore recalled that prior to the establishment of the Cheat View Public Service District in 1965 and completion of U.S. Route 48 in 1976, the area was nicknamed 'psycho valley' referring to the state of mind fellow Morgantown city residents imagined one would have to have been in to choose to reside in an area with so few amenities. At the time he moved to the area, Mr. Dinsmore recalled, a boxing arena existed at Sunset Beach, a stock car race track operated on what was previously a portion of the Baker family farm, and a drive-in theater was located on what is currently the last nine holes of the Lakeview Country Club golf course. This reflects that aside from farming the area's second major use throughout the 1930's and into the 1970's was recreational.

    The Cheat Lake area grew significantly during the last 15 years, and now has a population of over 9,000 residents. Public facilities include two grade schools, a middle school, a public library, and a volunteer fire department. The area receives public transportation service via the county bus line. It supports a small sector of commercial development, situated along Route 857 extending from Lakeview Country Club to Interstate 68 exit 10, and is home to offices of the West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey Center. Additionally Cheat Lake has a number of recreational areas such as the lake, Chestnut Ridge Park, and Cooper's Rock State Park.

Geography
 
    What is the "Cheat Lake Area"? Since there are no formal jurisdictional boundaries, such as a delineated "planning district" or incorporated area, the geographic area comprising "Cheat Lake" can be variously defined. For the purposes of this document, the area is defined on the basis of data availability. For much of the analysis, particularly that which focuses on population, housing, and economic characteristics, the delineated area is dependent upon published data for census block groups, and thus the block group boundaries must be used.

    There are five census block groups that comprise the Cheat Lake Area. The area is delineated in figure 1. The area essentially consists of the northeast corner of Monongalia County. This area may be somewhat larger than what many conceive of as the "Cheat Lake Area". However, since this is a preliminary investigation of issues, it was felt that it is better to be inclusive at this point. Note that some of the analyses of land use issues use a smaller geographic boundary, based on, for example, sewer district boundaries.

    Figure 2 shows a closer view of the Cheat Lake Area. The five shaded areas represent the five block groups, and can be referred to when reviewing the tables of demographic data. Also shown on figure 2 is a large rectangular box. This is the general location of what is referred to as the "core area" in the sub-district analysis of parcel data. Specifically, a more detailed look at land uses in this area (i.e., at the individual parcel level), is presented in this document under the heading "Sub-district analysis - parcel data".

Demographics

Population and Housing

    Population, together with employment data, largely determine the future land use, community facilities, infrastructures requirements, and environmental impacts of an area. As such, population information is key to any assessment of the future direction of the Cheat Lake Area.
 
    Regional Trends - 1980 to 1990
 
    To begin, some general growth patterns of the Cheat Lake Area can be viewed relative to growth patterns in the County as a whole. The area used in the following three tables comprises a large section of the eastern end of the County - Tracts 116, 117 and 118. This area is somewhat larger than the area traditionally viewed as the "Cheat Lake Areas. However, for purposes of comparison of larger regional trends, this area can be compared to the rest of Monongalia County to get a sense of the direction of change occurring in the eastern end of the County where the Cheat Lake Area is situated.

    Table 1 gives population and housing unit change during the 1980s for tracts 116, 117, and 118 and the rest of the County. Population growth for the eastern end of the county was dramatically higher than the rest of the county. While the County was experiencing population decline, the eastern end of the County was experiencing relatively high growth. Although more current data by tract for these areas is not available, it is reasonable to expect that the growth differential between the eastern end and the rest of the county has continued into the 1 990s.

    Housing unit change between 1980 and 1990 was also significantly higher for the eastern end of the County as compared to the rest of the County. A choropleth map of the distribution of growth differentials is given in figure 3. It can be seen that two block groups in the eastern end of the County (the Cheat Lake Area), had very high housing unit growth (although the block group with the highest growth in the County was not in the Cheat Lake Area, but in downtown Morgantown).

    Referring to table 1, tracts 116, 117 and 118 had a 21.7% increase in the number of housing units, whereas the rest of the County increased by only 5.4%. The effect of these increases on the vacancy rate for each area is also shown in Table 1. The housing vacancy rate (that is, the percent of housing units which were vacant in 1990) remained relatively stable for the eastern end of the County, whereas the vacancy rate for the rest of the County increased. This can be explained by the fact that a housing unit increase, coupled with population decline for the County (excluding the eastern end) produced a higher housing vacancy rate. For the eastern end, the housing unit increase kept pace with a strong population increase, resulting in an essentially unchanged vacancy rate.
 
 

   Table 2 presents regional trends between 1980 and 1990 for housing tenure. Overall, owner-occupied housing in the eastern end of the County is significantly higher than the rest of the County. The percentage of occupied housing units which were owneroccupied decreased slightly between 1980 and 1990 for both areas. The drop in housing ownership was higher for the eastern end of the County. The change in the percentage of housing units occupied by renters increased significantly for the eastern end of the County, more than 17%, while the rest of the County's share of renter-occupied housing increased only slightly.

    It should be noted that Monongalia County has one of the highest rental-occupancy rates in the State. This is driven by the urban nature of the County, relative to the rest of the State, and by the presence of a high number of University students. Typically, rural, poorer counties in the State have higher owner-occupancy rates than more urbanized areas such as Monongalia and Kanawha Counties. This is partly due to the fact that rural areas in West Virginia tend to have a very small market for rental housing (i.e., there is little demand). It is significant, then, that the renter-occupied housing rate for the eastern end of the County has increased. Relative to the State as a whole, this may be indicative of a slight change toward the traditional urban rental market, particularly in terms of its appeal as a rental housing source for West Virginia University students.
 
 
 

    Finally, table 3 presents the trend in the percentage of mobile homes which comprise the total housing unit stock for the area. The eastern end of the county, tracts 116 through 118, have a much higher percentage of mobile homes than the rest of the county. The percentage difference between the two areas is quite substantial. However, the trend between 1980 and 1990 indicates that the growth of mobile homes, as a percentage of total housing stock, was more marked for the rest of the County than for tracts 116, 117 and 118. The latter area increased its percentage of mobile homes a modest 1.4%, while the rest of the county had a significant increase in mobile housing units. Despite this trend, it is a significant finding that in 1990, nearly 30% of the housing units in the eastern end of the County were mobile homes.
 
 

Selected 1990 Population and Housing Characteristics

    In this section, 1990 census variables for the area comprising the "Cheat Lake Area", as defined in the previous section, are given. For each of these variables, data is given for the individual block groups comprising the area, summed for the area as a whole, as well as the City of Morgantown and the County of Monongalia, excluding the Cheat Lake Area. Block groups correspond to traffic analysis zones (TAZ's), which are also listed for reference. The source of the data is Summary Tape Files 1 A and 3A of the 1990 U. S. Census. Note that the 1990 population and housing figures for the Cheat Lake Area and the "rest of the County" listed in tables 1 through 3 do not match the data given below because the geographic area is defined differently for the tables in this section.

    There are hundreds of census variables which can be used to profile a community or region. For this analysis, several variables were selected for three broad topics which were felt to be particularly significant for the discussion of community development issues. The variables are organized into three tables: population, race, and age (table 4); housing (table 5), and household income (table 6).
 
 

    The figures shown in table 4 give a good indication of some of the differences between the Cheat Lake Area and the rest of the County. Several conclusions can be drawn. First, the Cheat Lake Area is predominantly white. While the City of Morgantown has about 8% minority population, the Cheat Lake Area overall has less than 2% (comprised of African-Americans, Asians and other races). Further, less that 1% of the population is Hispanic. Secondly, the Cheat Lake Area is significantly younger than the rest of the county or the City of Morgantown. For the area as a whole, more than 26% of the population is under the age of 18, as compared with 13.3% for the City and 19% for the rest of the County. Correspondingly, the Cheat Lake Area has fewer persons aged 65 and over. While 8.4% of the Cheat Lake Area is 65 and over, the City and the rest of the County have more than 11%. Finally, Cheat Lake has significantly fewer households with unrelated individuals, indicative of a more "traditional" family environment (as opposed to university student households or other types of households comprised of unrelated individuals). The difference in this regard between the City of Morgantown (19.6%) and the Cheat Lake Area (6.5%) is quite substantial.
 

    Table 5 presents a few characteristics about housing in the Cheat Lake Area. The Area comprises about 10.7% of the housing stock for the County, whereas the City of Morgantown contains almost half of the housing in the County. The figures indicate that the Cheat Lake Area is, overall, comprised mainly of single-family housing units, particularly in relation to the City and the rest of the County, both of which have much higher percentages of multiple-family housing. There is, however, a fairly high degree of variation in the type of housing units found within the boundaries of the Cheat Lake Area. TAZs 37 and 38, for example, have a much lower percentage of single-family housing than the other TAZs.
 
 

    The percentages of single-family housing units correspond with the percentage of mobile home units. TAZs 37 and 38, which have relatively low percentages of single-family housing units (as compared with the rest of Cheat Lake), have relatively high percentages of mobile home units. For the City of Morgantown as well as the rest of the County, lower percentages of single-family housing units correspond with higher percentages of multiplefamily housing units, and not necessarily mobile homes. This reflects the rural, low density nature of the Cheat Lake Area. Overall, the percentage of mobile homes units in the Cheat Lake Area is significantly higher than the City of Morgantown and the rest of the County (as noted previously).
 
 

    As a final group of statistics which can be used to characterize the Cheat Lake Area, table 6 presents data comparing mean household income in 1990, percent households with public assistance income, and percent households below the poverty level. Most striking is the relatively high mean household income for the area, as compared to either the City or the rest of the County. Block groups 116.005 and 118.006, have particularly high income levels, more than double the average income for the City of Morgantown. Correspondingly, the percentage of households below the poverty line is also relatively low for the Cheat Lake Area, and is less than half of the poverty level for the City of Morgantown or the County.

    There is a fairly wide variation in mean household income levels within the Cheat Lake Area. Block group 116.06 has about half the average income level of block groups 116.005 and 118.006, and block groups 117.001 and 118.005 are also significantly lower. Interestingly, block group 116.006 has no reported households which receive public assistance income, although its percentage of households below the poverty level is relatively high for the area (although well below the poverty levels for the City or the rest of the County).

Projected Population and Housing Unit Growth -1994 - 2020

    Residential development in the Cheat Lake Area during the last 6 years has been substantial. While there is no data on the number of new units built in 1996 and 1997, there were 404 housing units built between 1991 and 1995. This represents 30% of the total housing unit growth during this period for the County as a whole. It is also significant that the City of Morgantown, which is five times the size of the Cheat Lake Area, had only 136 more units constructed during this same time period. The geographic distribution of housing units in the County is shown in figure 4, and reveals that the southernmost section of the Cheat Lake Area and a section of the City of Morgantown have the highest number of housing units.

    It is extremely difficult to project the development of an area when there is no existing plan, government jurisdiction, zoning or other development control which would typically guide the growth of an area. However, a recent study undertaken by the City of Morgantown, completed by the firm of Barton-Aschman, in conjunction with the Regional Research Institute of West Virginia University, derived some projections for population and housing unit growth by traffic analysis zone (TAZ). Employment data was also projected, and are discussed in the next section.

    Table 7 lists the projected housing unit growth for the year 2020 for the Cheat Lake Area (TAZs 37-40), the City, and the County excluding Cheat Lake. It can be seen that housing unit growth is expected to be fairly high in the Cheat Lake Area, compared to the rest of the County and the City of Morgantown.
 

    Another study recently completed which projects population and housing unit growth for the Cheat Lake Area is the Final Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the MonFayette Transportation Project. For the County as a whole, the transportation study done by Barton-Aschman (in conjunction with the Regional Research Institute) projects a 16% increase in the total population for the County between 1995 and 2020. But according to the Mon-Fayette Expressway Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), the population increase for tract 117.01, north of Cheat Lake, may have significantly higher population growth. In the latter study, the population for this tract is expected to jump 52% (from 1,977 to 3,782) between the years 1990 and 2020.

    There are significant differences between the Barton-Aschman study and the FEIS with regard to residential growth, which is discussed further under the section "Projected land use change". It does appear that the Barton-Aschman study undercounts residential growth, particularly in census tract 117. The study projects only 266 new units in the twenty-five year period of 1995-2020 for that tract, despite the fact that 144 units were constructed between 1991 and 1995 alone. The discrepancy may be the result of a need to conform to the constraints imposed by transportation modeling methodology. Note that projected housing units are simply the result of dividing the projected population by a population per household figure of 2.4 for each traffic analysis zone.

    The best approach, for the purposes of this study, may be to work with a lower and upper estimate of population growth. For the lower limit, the Barton-Aschman population estimate can be used. Working backwards from the housing unit projection, which was

derived by dividing population by an assumed 2.4 persons per household (assuming no vacancies), the projected population for the year 2020 is 12,976. ' This represents a 40% increase in population between 1995 and 2020.

    For an upper limit, population growth projected in the Final Environmental Impact Study for the Mon-Fayette expressway can be used in conjunction with other data. In that study, population growth for tract 117 was expected to increase by 52% between the years 1990 and 2020. Adding the population figure for this tract to the population projection for the remainder of the Cheat Lake Area, based on the Barton-Aschman study, gives an upper limit projection. For tract 117, then, the population for the year 2020 is projected at 3782 (according to the FEIS). The population figure for the other block groups in the Cheat Lake Area, based on data in the Barton-Aschman study, can be projected at 10,015 for the year 2020. Adding these figures together, an upper limit population figure is projected at 13,797.  This represents a 49% increase in population between 1995 and 2020. Since these are estimates only, the population projections can be rounded to give a population projection range of 13,000 to 13,800 by the year 2020 for the Cheat Lake Area.

    What is particularly interesting for the purposes of this assessment of the Cheat Lake Area is that the transportation study anticipates that the northeastern and eastern sections of the county, much of which is made up of the Cheat lake Area, will have the highest growth in new housing units: between 15 and 19 percent of the total housing unit growth in the County by the year 2020. Job growth for these areas, on the other hand, is expected to be disproportionately lower, expected to comprise between 4 and 7 percent of the total growth in jobs for the County. Although job growth in the Cheat Lake Area is expected to be strong relative to existing employment in the area, the balance between new housing units and job creation is not proportionate. This "jobs-housing imbalance" is discussed under Section 3:  Development Issues, as well as in the following section.

    Figure 4 can be compared with Figure 5 to illustrate the job-housing imbalance which currently exists. Figure 5 shows the geographic distribution, by block group, of current (1995) employment. It can be seen that employment is concentrated for the most part in Morgantown. When this figure is compared to figure 4, the disparity between jobs and housing balance is graphically illustrated.
 

 Economic Data

    In the absence of any future-oriented local planning, development controls, or economic development plan, it is difficult to estimate future employment growth. This difficulty is evident in the fact that two major transportation studies which cover the area - the Barton-Aschman transportation study and the Mon-Fayette Expressway Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)- offer significantly different projections of long-range employment growth for tract 117, the area which includes all land north of Cheat Lake. Table 8 compares the data from these reports:
 
 

	Estimated 1994	Projected 2020	Percent Increase	Estimated 1996	Projected 2020	Percent Increase
Tract 117	982	1742	77%	613	2713	343%

 

    The table presents projected employment growth in the FEIS for the commercial (as opposed to industrial) sector only. Obviously, this projection is significantly different than that reported by the Barton-Aschman Study. One reason why these differences are so significant may be that the Barton-Aschman Study does not consider the impacts to the area immediately surrounding the expressway, but rather considers the County as a whole.

    For the remainder of this section, the more conservative estimate of employment and economic data from the Barton-Aschman study will be considered. These estimates are used for the following reasons. First, the Barton-Aschman study is more recent (the estimates used were generated in 1996, while the FEIS document was completed in 1994). Second, the Barton-Aschman study uses a model which considers the County as a whole, rather than focusing on one specific area (i.e., tract 117). Third, the FEIS states that the original employment estimates from the WVU Bureau of Business Research for tract 117 were for the creation of 332 new jobs between 1996 and 2020. The authors of the FEIS state that "based on discussions with local developers and economic development personnel this projection [of 332 new jobs] appeared to be very conservative" (FEIS, pg. v-35). The resulting methodology, whereby a 50 percent increase in commercial sector jobs is estimated, does not appear to be well substantiated.

    As can be seen in table 9, employment is expected to grow substantially in the County during the next 25 years. On the whole, total employment for the Cheat Lake Area is expected to increase 108%, compared to 27% for Morgantown. Traffic Analysis Zone 40 (block groups 118.005 and 118.006) is expected to have the most increase (332%). Retail employment growth is expected to keep pace with other areas of the county, consisting of approximately 21 % growth between 1995 and 2020.

    As a final component of the analysis of economic data, table 10 shows the number of businesses in the Cheat Lake Area relative to population. This data is also compared to the City of Morgantown, and the rest of the county. It can be seen that the ratio of businesses per 1,000 population is significantly lower for the Cheat Lake Area than for the other two areas. The number of retail businesses per 1,000 population is also significantly lower. This is a reflection of the urban vs. rural nature of the different areas, but also points to the fact that the Cheat Lake Area is significantly underserved by business establishments.
 
 

Existing Land Use

    It is a fairly straightforward task to describe current land use in the Cheat Lake Area, for it is characterized predominantly by low-density development and rural lands. In this section, the land use distribution for the entire area will be described using mapped distributions of different land uses. On a more detailed level, a sub-district analysis will present statistics on parcel-level data.

    The distribution of land uses for the entire Cheat Lake Area is shown on two maps, figure 6 and figure 7. The first figure shows land uses which are more low-density in nature, i.e., single-family residential areas, agricultural land, forests, and vacant land. In reviewing this figure, it is apparent that most of the area is covered by these land uses. Single-family residential areas are more centrally located (around the interstate), and agricultural land surrounds these areas. To the east, Coopers Rock State Forest occupies a large portion of land. Vacant lands are scattered throughout the area.

    Figure 7 shows the distribution of a number of other land uses found in the Cheat Lake Area. These include, industrial, commercial, and public land uses (such as County owned lands). Comparing this figure with figure 6, it is apparent that "other" land uses comprise a small proportion of land relative to low-density uses. Another observation is that non-residential land uses are concentrated along the northern shore of the lake, around the intersection of Route 857 and Interstate 68.

Sub-district Analysis - parcel data

    As mentioned earlier, a sub-district analysis was performed for a selected set of parcels. The approximate boundary of the selected set was shown in figure 2. This area comprises the most developed section of the Cheat Lake Area, and thus can be thought of as its "core". Parcel data for this analysis was obtained from SpecPrint, a real estate information service company which provides data to the Monongalia County Tax Assessor. The data is from 1996.

     The land use designation assigned by the County Tax Assessor's office, along with the total taxed value, cost per acre, number of parcels, total acreage, and its percentage of the total acreage for the area. It can be seen that the predominate land uses in the area are low-density: land in the area is approximately 39% farmland (active or inactive), 29% single-family residential, 21% vacant (residential vacant, vacant exempt land, utility vacant, general commercial vacant., and large vacanVunknown potential), 4% private recreational (mostly golf courses), 3% public land (a section of Coopers Rock State Forest), and the remaining 4% is comprised of a wide variety of other uses. Less than 1% of land is comprised of  commercial or office uses. Approximately 2% of land consists of mobile homes, either in the form of mobile home parks (1.06%), or individual mobile homes (0.82%). The fact that mobile homes make up a low percentage of land area but a high percentage of the total number of units in the area (table 3) is indicative of the relatively high density of mobile home parks.

    Figure 8 and figure 9 give a visual breakdown of land uses in this core area.  The figrues give a graphic view of the degree to which the Cheat Lake Area is still a predominantly rural area, with only a low-density (i.e.,  single-family) form of residential development.  Note that figure 9 includes only the top 10 land uses in the area, which changes the relatives percentages.
 

Brief Description

    In 1994, the Final Environmental Impact Statement or FEIS was completed for a 12 mile section of highway to be constructed between Fairchance, PA (Route 43) and the Cheat Lake Area, part of a larger 65-mile "Mon/Fayette Transportation Project" intended to link Morgantown and Pittsburgh. Obviously, the project is extremely relevant to the Cheat Lake Area, because the highway begins at 1-68, exit 10 (the Cheat Lake exit), and because it will link the area directly to Uniontown and Pittsburgh. The goals of the new highway are to increase safety and highway capacity, enhance efficiency in the movement of goods and services, and ultimately to improve regional economic conditions.

    The new highway will be a multi-lane, limited access expressway with three interchanges between Cheat Lake and Route 43: the Cheat Neck area, the state line, and near Rubles Mill. Residents of the Cheat Lake area will access the new highway at the Cheat Neck interchange. Although the exact (i.e., parcel specific) location of the highway and the interchanges is still being negotiated, the general location of the new highway can be shown (see figure 10).

    In this section, a description of the regional and local effects of the new highway on the Cheat Lake Area are summarized. Most of the information in this section was obtained from the Final Environmental Impact Statement (1994),and the West Virginia Department of Highways.

Current Status of Project

    Portions of the highway extending to the city of Pittsburgh are already under construction. In West Virginia, two sections of the highway are still under final design, scheduled to be completed at the end of 1997. Following final design approval, construction is slated to begin in early 1998. However, the bill which authorizes the funding of the project is currently being rewritten. The proposed date for completion of the rewrite is October, 1997.

    Initial construction, Phase I, of the 12-mile section of the Mon-Fayette highway will begin with the construction of the highway extending to the state line including the new Cheat Neck Interchange. Phase II improvement efforts will center around the completion of the interchange construction at 1-68.

Regional Effects

    The primary regional effect of the new highway will be to stimulate economic activity and generate employment. According to the FEIS, an additional annual income for the region of $11.67 million for the year 2020 is projected to occur. This income is expected to result from induced development in the region. In turn, this new development is expected to occur as a result of improved access to the Cheat Lake area. Improved access will stimulate residential development as well as new commercial development.

    It must be emphasized, however, that there is no clearly defined quantitative method available for measuring future economic activity resulting from the new expressway since the area lacks planning and planning implementation mechanisms (such as zoning) which would typically guide future development in the region. This is compounded by the fact that economic forecasts are uncertain in any event, given the uncertainty of national, regional and local economic and sociodemographic trends, and the fact that there are differences in time frames between public investments in major infrastructure improvements and decision-making by the private sector concerning facility location or expansion.

    Further, studies which have looked at the relationship between economic development and highway improvements have not been consistent. Such studies have produced conflicting results as to whether or not new highways and highway improvements actually generate economic activity. For the Cheat Lake Area specifically, the new highway may indeed "produce" growth, but it must be recognized that it will simply attract growth that  would have occurred somewhere in the region anyway. Thus, the highway does not "create" growth, but rather influences its location. Further, increase in highway traffic may be unrelated to population growth, but may instead be the result of residents' willingness to drive further or make new trips because of an increase in convenience. There is also no clear consensus about the amount or type of development expected to occur.

Local Effects

    The most direct impact to residents of the Cheat Lake Area will be the elimination of the exit 10 on/off ramp and the disruption of the existing commercial center at exit 10 and along Route 857. Specifically, the BFS Gas/Convenience Store and Bruceton Bank will be displaced, and two residential units - one house and one mobile home - will be relocated. The new Cheat Neck Interchange will cut across the Norris/Baker/Simpson farm, approximately 1 mile north of the current exit 10.

    Residences and businesses along Route 857 on either side of the 1-68 interchange, including Ashebrooke Square, will also be significantly impacted. Primarily, this impact will consist of the disruption and rerouting of the current traffic flow, resulting in decreased accessibility. Access from the expressway to Ashbrooke Square, for example, will be via the Cheat Neck interchange, and require a more circuitous route than the current easy access from exit 10.

    On the positive side, the new overpasses at the i-68 interchange will improve local accessibility, allowing the uninterrupted use of Route 857 in the immediate area. Further, diversion of through traffic onto the new roadway will decrease usage of Route 857, thus increasing travel safety for local residents. In terms of emergency services such as fire and medical, the reduction in through traffic on local access road (County Route 88/1 as well as Route 857) will reduce travel times. Offsetting this improvement in local access, however, is the fact that travel distance for Cheat Lake residents to reach 1-68 will increase by an additional one mile, on average.

    The immediate area will be adversely affected by noise and visual impacts. Noise levels between the 1-68 interchanges and the new Cheat Neck interchange (in the general vicinity of the Norris/Baker/Simpson farm) will increase from an existing 15 decibels to 60 decibels, a 4-fold increase. Visually, the addition of a four-lane expressway is out of character with the current rural character of the area. This is graphically portrayed in figure 11, a rendering of the interchange, facing east. The rendering is taken from the Final Environmental Impact Statement (pg. Vl-49).

    A number of historic properties and community facilities will be adversely affected by the new expressway. In the Cheat Lake area between 1-68 and the state line, ten historic properties will be directly or indirectly impacted. In addition to the Norris/Baker/Simpson farm, historic properties which will be most directly impacted include: the Sylvester Ridgway House, where a right of way will be situated within 300' of the building introducing noise and visual impacts; the George C. Rude Log and Frame House, where the excavation of a nearby hill will introduce visual and eventually noise impacts; and the Anthony G. Lewellen House, where proposed bridge construction will be almost immediately overhead of the structure resulting in a virtual isolation of the area from the rest of the surrounding property. In addition, two cemeteries in the Cheat Lake area (Zion Church cemetery and Baker cemetery) and St. Luke's Catholic Church will bear visual and noise impacts due to their proximity to the interchange. Finally, the portion of Cooper's Rock State Forest located west of Rt. 857 will be adversely affected by visual, noise and air impacts resulting from the construction of the new expressway.

    Anytime the accessibility of an area is increased, the behavior of developers and consumers is significantly influenced. Initially, the building of the new interchange will lead to increased pressure to develop ancillary land uses such as gas stations and restaurants. Major interstate interchange areas typically attract fast-food restaurants and gas stations, and this is the type of development expected to occur close to the new expressway. Eventually, however, the FEIS estimates that the area within a one-mile radius of the i68/Cheat Neck interchange will encourage other types of commercial development, including a shopping center with a supermarket, a hotel/convention center, business parks, and professional offices. The land use changes associated with the new expressway are discussed further in the next section.
 
 Projected land Use Change in the Expressway area

    As stated repeatedly in this report, it is very difficult to anticipate what changes will occur in an area where there is no development control and no future-oriented planning activity. With this caveat in mind, it is useful to project what is expected to occur in the region as a result of two interrelated events: the Mon-Fayette expressway, and secondly, population growth.

    The Mon-Fayette Final Environment Impact Statement (FEIS) analyzed the projected land use changes for a one-mile radius surrounding the new 1-68/Cheat Neck interchanges. In this section, these projected changes will be described.

    The FEIS describes a "Possible Future Build-Out Land Use Scenario" for undeveloped lands which is a"possible maximum". The land use scenario is based on the assumption that professional offices, such as a business park, and commercial types of developments would occur within a one-mile radius (the project's "area of influence"). This rationale is based on the idea that developments most affected by improved accessibility will most likely locate close to interchanges, as opposed to further away. Further, the projected new development can easily be accommodated within this one-mile area. The area of influence is shown in figure 12.

    Varying densities of new residential development as a result of the expressway are also expected to occur within the one-mile radius. Residential expansion is expected to take place even without the new expressway, as a result of the attractiveness of the area, the expansion of utilities, and its proximity to Morgantown and West Virginia University. The new highway, however, will additionally open up the area north of the interchange. Improved access to points northward could generate additional housing demand from areas to the north, such as Uniontown. The densities and types of residential areas will typically vary with respect to the location of the interchanges and the expressway, as well as the surrounding land use. Higher density housing, similar to the existing Skyview Apartment complex or Braemar townhouse development, may also locate within the one-mile radius.

    The land area requirements anticipated were based on population and employment projections for the period 1996 to 2020. These projections were multiplied by associated land area figures taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Manual (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1991). Thus, for each employment type, the number of new employees is used to predict needed building and land area. Projections of future residential areas within the one-mile radius are based on overall population growth as well as increases associated with the influx of new jobs.

    It is anticipated that commercial services will be developed in the area given the fact that residents must currently travel ten miles for essential items such as grocery and clothing goods (this is discussed further in the "Development Issues" section). The anticipated development of professional offices and business parks is based on the fact that accessibility will be greatly improved, and the location, in close proximity to the new expressway, will be highly visible. According to the FEIS, light industrial development is not expected to occur. This assumption is based on interviews with county officials, local developers, and economic development personnel.

    Table 13 presents a summary of the anticipated development areas needed to accommodate new growth within the one-mile area of influence. This table should be compared to figure 14, which is a projection of the absolute maximum possible future land use development (as projected in the FEIS). For reference, the existing land uses in the area of influence are shown in figure 13.
 
 

	Total development area	Acres required to accommodate growth	% required of total area identified
Commercial	154	84	54.5%
Residential	401	210	52.4%
Total Development	555	294	52.9%

 
     In the table, the total development area represents all current and future land use acreage maximally projected for the year 2020 for each development type listed. This column corresponds with figure 14. The "acres required to accommodate growth" column represents the acreage allocated for new development, directly or indirectly associated with the new expressway. The final column indicates what percentage of the total development is allocated for this new growth. In other words, the FEIS is projecting that new development will require only 294 of the 555 acres available.

    For commercial land, it is projected that there will be 154 acres "available" within a one-mile radius of the new interchanges. The employment projections of 2100 new jobs in Census Tract 117 by the year 2020, resulted in a demand of 84 acres of commercial land area. Since 154 acres are presumed to be available, the FEIS is projecting a surplus of 70 acres of land available for commercial development. The overall conclusion, then, is that there is ample land available to accommodate projected new growth without impacting existing environmental resources.

    For residential land, the FEIS estimates that the new expressway will generate an additional 25% in residential development above the expected level which would result regardless of the new highway development (for reasons stated previously). The percentage translates into a projected demand of 630 new units, consuming 210 acres of land between 1996 and 2020. Note that this is a significantly higher figure than the projected figure given in the Barton-Aschman transportation study. In the latter study, only 266 new housing units were projected to be built between 1995 and 2020 in census tract 117, a figure which seems low for reasons previously stated.

    The residential acreage required to accommodate new housing units, 210 acres, is far short of the total area estimated to be available for residential growth, the "total development area" of 401 acres. The FEIS is therefore predicting that a surplus of 191 acres above that required for new development may occur. The overall conclusion is that there is sufficient (if not ample) land available to accommodate future growth.

    Finally, the overall land use change for a variety of different land uses can be evaluated. Table 14 is based on figures 13 and 14, and compares how the percentages of various land uses in the area of influence are projected to change between 1996 (existing) and 2020 (possible future build-out land use scenario). Since the future build-out is a maximum build-out, actual loss to forests and rangeland could be significantly less because the FEIS anticipates that there is more than adequate land available to accommodate future land area needed for commercial and residential growth. Thus, as previously stated, the land required for new residential and commercial growth (see table 13) was anticipated to require only 52.9% of the total development area.
 
 

Buildout Analysis for the Cheat Lake Area

    Despite the lack of planning and development controls, it can be anticipated that the Cheat Lake Area will continue to experience the development of upscale professional offices such as Cranberry Square, higher-priced housing developments such as Greystone, rental and time-share apartments or town-homes, and new commercial development to accommodate the growth in residential areas and professional services. There are several factors which will contribute to this growth. First, the recreational amenities of the area, which currently attract growth, will be expanded in the future and therefore stimulate additional growth. Second, the new expressway will likely generate some additional growth, although, as previously stated, it is difficult to predict its impact. Third, improvement and expansion of water and sewer services will open up new areas of development. These three factors, together with the anticipated overall population and employment growth anticipated for the County, mean that pressure to continue development in the Area is highly likely.

    The main questions to be resolved are: where will this new growth most likely occur, and how much new development can the area sustain? To answer this question, a preliminary "buildoutanalysis" focusing on residential development was performed for the area, and the results of this analysis are outlined in this section. In addition, land area requirements for non-residential uses are also evaluated.

Land available for msidenffal development

    Charting the residential buildout potential of the Cheat Lake Area and assessing any potential problems associated with it is a two step process. The first step is to determine how much developable land currently exists in the area. Typically, this involves an assessment of zoning regulations. In lieu of zoning controls, the following criteria can be used to evaluate the development potential of land in the Cheat Lake Area:

· Areas (parcels) which are currently vacant or underdeveloped.

· Areas which have access to sewer, or which will have access based on future utility expansion.

· Areas which are proximal to existing roads (i.e., areas which are within '/. mile of an existing road).

· Areas which have significant environmental constraints, such as steep slopes.

    There are significant natural boundaries in the Cheat Lake Area. The area to the south and east of 1-68 is limited by Coopers Rock State Forest. South of 1-68, Lakeview Resort occupies a significant portion of land area, precluding development in that location. There are areas of steep slopes along the lake and in other locations which preclude development. In addition to these limits on residential expansion, new development in the Cheat Lake Area is dependent on the availability of roads, sewer and water. To some extent, the location of further development in the area will depend on the availability of these essential public services.

    Sewerage (which refers to the system of pipes and facilities required to transport, treat and discharge wastewater), highways and water supply are extremely capital intensive. Therefore their location and capacities require careful planning. It is important to understand the relationship between land use development and the provision of these services. In some areas, lack of sewerage can halt residential construction, or result in increased use of septic tanks or local package treatment systems, neither or which are optimal solutions. In turn, private sewage systems have significant land use and environmental effects. If private sewage systems are allowed to proliferate, highly dispersed development will occur. The direct environmental impact of this is the deterioration of groundwater resources. In addition, highly dispersed development results in the loss of agricultural and forest land, increased travel time, increased energy consumption, and other negative consequences of development dispersion.

    Existing sewer capacity in the area is indicated in figure 17 (gray shaded area). Currently, Greystone and Lakeview Resort to the north of Cheat Lake are serviced by Cheat Progressive Ventures' package treatment facility located near Sunset Beach. Housing development along Route 857 is currently serviced by individual septic systems. The Morgantown Utility Board is planning, within the next several years, to take over the package treatment facility and expand its capacity more than threefold. Specifically, the current capacity of the facility is 200,000 gallons per day; this will be expanded to 750,000 gallons per day.

    The area south of Cheat Lake and Interstate 68 is currently serviced by eight separate package treatment plants. These plants were put in to service separate housing developments in the area, known as Whites Run. In order to meet environmental regulations, these individual treatment plants will most likely be combined over the next few years and taken over by the Morgantown Utility Board (negotiations are currently underway). The consolidation of these plants will result in the construction of a pumping station on the south side of Cheat Lake, somewhere near the intersection of Tyrone and Route 857, and be funneled under the lake to be processed at the treatment facility currently owned by Cheat Progressive Venture.

    The areas indicated in figure 17 include both Phase I and Phase II sewer projects. While the overall plan is to consolidate both areas under the Morgantown Utility Board over the next few years, Phase I consolidation (Greystone, Lakeview Resort, and the 8 package treatment plants to the south of Cheat Lake) is more likely to occur than Phase II (the remaining areas). Phase II proposed improvements would consolidate areas in the Union district and along Route 857, both of which are currently on septic systems. It is felt that the completion of Phase II is less likely because many individual property owners currently on septic systems would resist the change from septic to public sewer due to the added cost. For planning purposes, however, it is not unreasonable to assume that the areas shaded in gray in figure 17 represent the areas most likely to benefit from public sewer systems in the future, and therefore the areas most attractive for future development.

    To some extent, any part of the Cheat Lake Area could be opened up to development by providing water, sewer and transportation. However, it is likely that new development will be most profitable in areas that are already serviced. In monetary terms, new sewer lines cost twice as much as water lines, and therefore sewer is a particularly significant factor influencing development decisions. While it is true that a developer could put in a package treatment facility, its cost, roughly $40,000 to $50,000 is a prohibitive factor. Further, septic systems generally require larger lot sizes (1 to 2 acres minimum), which offers less incentive to developers. Since areas currently serviced by water extend throughout the Cheat Lake Area, it is appropriate to look to the location of proposed sewer improvements to determine areas most suited for future development.

    The location of roads is also a limiting factor. The construction of a new road to provide access for a proposed development is a significant cost factor. Therefore, it is likely that new development will concentrate in areas already serviced by existing roads.

    Based on these criteria, then, three different maps were produced to analyze the availability of land based on the application of different factors.

   Level I analysis. If development is restricted to vacant land serviced by existing and proposed public sewer systems, and within one-quarter mile of an existing road, only 55 acres of land are currently available. Figure 17 shows the land available. By overlaying vacant lands with lands within the sewer district (existing and proposed), and lands (shown in yellow) which are within proximity to existing roads, only those areas shown in bright yellow would be available for future development - approximately 55 acres.

 Level II analysis. If development is restricted only to vacant land within one-quarter mile of an existing road, regardless of its proximity to sewer lines, there would be approximately 2,128 acres of land available in the Cheat Lake Area. These areas are shown in figure 18. Total vacant land in the Cheat Lake Area is approximately 2,900 acres.

    Level III analysis. If development is restricted to a particular growth corridor (i.e., the area around Highway 68 which currently has the greatest concentration of development), and some assumptions are made regarding the capacity of existing residential land, vacant land, and agricultural land, 900 acres are available for development. These areas are shown in figure 19. More specifically, in the core area of Cheat Lake, there are 311 acres (out of a total of 536 acres) of single-family residential development. It can be assumed that roughly 1/3 of these developed areas have acreage available to accommodate future expansion (for example, approximately one-half of the Greystone residential area is still available for housing development; other areas have less capacity). Thus, approximately 104 acres of land could be available from existing single-family residential land. If this is added to vacant acreage (454 acres) and agricultural acreage (342 acres) in the core area, a total of 900 acres is available for future residential expansion. Areas highlighted in yellow in figure 19 constitute residential land in the core area.

    Thus the amount of acreage available for residential growth varies widely depending on the criteria used. Obviously, limiting development to vacant land in the proposed sewer district will accommodate very little expansion (55 acres). The next step in the buildout analysis is to determine how much land is needed to accommodate future growth. This is detailed in the next section.

Future Land Needs

    The second step in the assessment of future buildout is to determine the future land needs required as a function of population and employment growth. Although only land for residential growth was evaluated in the previous section, this section will evaluate future land needs beyond residential uses. The basic process is to project population and employment growth into specific land use acreage requirements. Three types of land uses were analyzed: residential areas, employment generating land uses, such as offices and commercial activities, and community facilities.

    Projected growth and associated land use requirements

    Estimated residential land use requirements

    Projected housing units for the year 2020 was revealed in an earlier section. It may be useful to adjust this projection to derive a range of projected housing units by slightly altering some of the variables used. In this section, the derivation of an alternate housing unit projection is explained.

    Deriving the space requirements for residential areas is a multi-step process.  First, the total number of new dwellings required to house the future population is determined. This total number is then broken down by type and density of dwellings, for example single-family vs. multiple-family housing units. Finally, the quantity of dwellings, by type, is converted to land acreage requirements.

    Earlier, it was estimated that an upper limit population figure of 13,800 was a reasonable estimate based on projected growth as a result of the expressway (in tract 117), and additional growth in the other areas of Cheat Lake. This figure can be used to project an alternate number of units; that is, instead of the figure which was obtained by simply dividing the projected population by an assumed population per household figure of 2.4. In the alternate method, a persons per household figure of 2.6, which is the 1990 ratio of persons per household, is used to determine a rough estimate of housing need by 2020. In step 4 in table 15, the vacancy rate (in 1990) is used to provide an adjusted estimate of the housing stock required. This amount is then subtracted from the existing housing stock to yield an estimate of 1993 additional dwellings. Existing housing stock (as of 1995) was determined by adding together the 1990 housing units in the Cheat Lake Area (3373), and the number of units constructed between 1991 and 1995 (404). Next an adjustment is made for housing units lost due to fire, abandonment, demolition, or conversion to non-residential use. A rate of 5% of the existing housing stock was used for this figure. Finally, the replacement figure is added to the earlier estimate of 1993 to arrive at a final estimate of 2082 new dwellings. Note that this figure is substantially higher than the figure of 1,590 new units by 2020 given in the Barton-Aschman study. It was noted earlier that this figure was believed to be fairly conservative. The discrepancy may be due to the fact that a vacancy rate was not applied, nor was there an adjustment made for loss of existing housing units.

    The next step is to distribute this total housing stock to various housing types. This can be done in a number of ways, resulting in any number of different scenarios. For this analysis, two scenarios will be considered. First, by assuming the same distribution of housing types found in the area in 1990, current trends can simply be extrapolated into the future. In 1990, 67.4 % of the existing housing units were single-family, 7.6% were multiplefamily, and 24.3% were mobile homes. Single family detached housing can be divided between 2 and 4 dwelling units per acre.

    An alternate scenario would allocate more units to single family detached housing. This could be based on the fact that most of the housing unit growth between 1991 and 1995 came from construction of new single-family detached housing units, as opposed to mobile homes or multiple-family housing, and thus the 1990 percentages may have changed somewhat (and may continue to change in the future). Therefore an allocation of 80% single family detached (divided between lower density and mid density), 12% mobile homes and 8% multiple-family could be an alternate scenario.

    It should be noted that these estimates could be substantially revised if planning and/or zoning objectives - based on resident preferences regarding future development of the area - were instituted for the Cheat Lake Area. Thus, trends can be adjusted to reflect community policy, in which, for example, higher proportions of mid-density housing are encouraged.  Thus, high-rise apartments and other high density housing types are not included. It is possible, however, that higher densities could be accommodated in the area, particularly if they are part of a planned development (such as a neotraditional neighborhood type), as a strategy to protect open space.

    In the first column after housing type, the total of 2,082 projected new housing units is allocated to different categories of housing. The average density in dwellings per acre is then determined on the basis of net, gross, and neighborhood density. Net density is the land area devoted only to residential use; gross density includes, in addition to residential use, land area for streets, rights of way, and undevelopable land parcels. Gross density is usually 15 to 20 percent lower than net density. Neighborhood density includes, in addition to residential areas and streets, an allotment for parking, schools, shopping, community facilities, and other associated lands. While the net density figure can be used to estimate acreage requirements in areas which are already developed (that is, have streets and infrastructure in place), gross and neighborhood densities are appropriate for areas which are currently undeveloped and require street extensions and other community services. For much of the Cheat Lake Area, gross densities may be the most appropriate acreage requirements to consider.

    When the total number of new units, allocated by type, are divided by net, gross, and neighborhood densities, the remaining columns (the right half of the table) give estimated acreage requirements. Current housing type distributions are allocated to new housing units, the total net acreage required is 592 acres, while the total gross acreage requirement is 785 acres. If neighborhood density is used, an estimated 1110 acres will be needed by the year 2020 to accommodate housing unit growth.

    For the alternate scenario of projected housing development, the number of units allocated to different housing types changes (column 1). Specifically, the number of new units allocated for mobile homes versus single family detached (mid-density and lower density) is altered (the allocation for multiple family units remains the same). The same net, gross, and neighborhood densities are used; however, the resulting acreage requirements change. Under this scenario, total net density would consume 661 acres; gross density would consume 878 acres; and neighborhood density would consume 1,250 acres. It can thus be seen how the allocation of projected new housing units to lower density housing development requires more land area. The magnitude of this change can vary widely depending on how the projected housing units are allocated.
 
    Using gross density requirements, the results can now be compared with land availability determined in the previous section. Under the two scenarios, between 785 and 878 acres of land will be needed to accommodate future residential expansion. This could be accommodated under the level lil analysis, in which all vacant land, one-third of singlefamily land, and all agricultural land is assumed to be available for residential expansion in the core area of Cheat Lake. The prospect that all vacant and agricultural lands would have to be developed, and existing residential areas would have to maximize their capacities, is not an optimal situation. Obviously, development outside of this core area would have to be accommodated, since not all vacant and agricultural land in the core area will be available for future development.

    Estimated acreage required for employment-generating land uses

    Typically, the development of a future plan for commercial land uses involves a regional approach in which the hierarchy of activity centers is assessed, and an interacting network of locations and facilities is analyzed and planned for. Usually two types of activity centers are involved: activity centers which are primarily employment areas (for example, industrial districts and office parks), and centers which are primarily commercial in nature (for example, strip commercial development or clusters of auto sales establishments).

    Based on projected growth in the Cheat lake Area, it is reasonable to assume that activity centers of both kinds may locate in the area during the next 10 to 20 years. Since there is no plan to guide future development, some assumptions must be made about what kinds of development are most likely to occur. Once these assumptions are made, the projected land use requirements for future development can be analyzed.

    To make land use requirement estimates, a total employment figure by traffic analysis zone is used.
 

Block group/TAZ	Employment	New jobs by 2020	Estimated Employment 2020
116.005/37	372	288	660
116.06/38	79	61	140
117.001/39	982	760	1742
118.005,118.006/40	198	658	856
Total Cheat Lake Area	1631	1767	3398

    Once the number of employees is estimated, typically a planner, working in conjunction with local residents and officials, will develop employment density standards (i.e., employees per gross acre of employment center area). This density standard can be used to estimate the number of acres required for future development. Additional acres are usually added as a safety factor in case development is at a lower density than predicted, or economic growth is faster than projected.

    The analysis of future activity center land use requirements will focus on three types of areas: office parks, industrial parks, and commercial centers. This determination is based on two factors. First, it is reasonable to assume that the completion of the expressway will encourage growth of professional offices, fueled in part by the continued development of higher-priced housing. New commercial development, in turn, will be required to accommodate the growth in residential areas and professional services. As mentioned, the recreational amenities of the area, the new expressway, and the improvement and expansion of water and sewer services will open up new areas of development. Some light industrial development, included in a planned office park development, may also be anticipated.

    In sum, a combination of commercial, office, and industrial development in the Cheat Lake Area may be expected to occur during the next 20 years. In order to analyze potential locations and impacts of this new development, it is useful to present a range of scenarios of land development which would satisfy the projected growth in employment.

    Neighborhood shopping center. The most basic of commercial needs in the Cheat Lake Area is the need for increased shopping. Currently, there are a few small convenience stores in the area, but residents must travel ten miles for grocery, clothing, and other essential items. Given the projected population of the area - between 13,000 and 13,800 by the year 2020 - it is most likely that the kind of commercial development that may occur is a neighborhood type of shopping center. Given the strong need for this type of development, a neighborhood level shopping center is included in all three scenarios presented. Not only is there a strong need for this type of development, but it is clear that a neighborhood level shopping center could be supported by the projected population of Cheat Lake. These centers typically occupy from 2.5 to 10 acres, and serve a population of 2,500 to 40,000. The radius of the market area served is approximately 1.5 miles. The leading tenant in this type of development is a supermarkets Since commercial land uses, on average, generate approximately 25 employees per acre, we can expect that between 62 and 250 employees would be generated by a neighborhood shopping center. As a reasonable assumption regarding new shopping development, the scenarios use a mid-point of 6.5 acres and 150 employees.

    Industrial park/Office park This category of development includes a wide range of land use types, planned and developed as an optimal environment for industrial, office, and/or related service activities. For the Cheat lake Area, a non-manufacturing industrial park which includes offices, office-warehouses, or laboratories may be developed. Office buildings associated with industrial, medical, wholesaling and related business activities may be anticipated. Research and development (R&D) parks may also be appropriate. Services for the employees of the parks, such as hotels, restaurants and health centers may also be associated with this type of industrial park development.

    If the development includes offices exclusively, here termed "office park", its average size may be approximately 40 acres.6 Depending on the employee density standard used, an office park will typically accommodate approximately 25 to 30 employees per acre. It could therefore be expected that an average-sized office park would generate about 1000 to 1200 employees. Parks which are more industrial in nature (i.e., include warehouses or wholesale distribution centers) may have an average size of 300 acres. However, given the relatively small market area involved, a smaller sized industrial park of 100 acres would probably be more likely. Industrial parks of this type generate between 8 and 16 employees per acre, depending on the employee density used. Therefore, between 800 and 1600 employees could be generated by a small sized industrial park. For the land use scenarios presented a figure of 1100 employees for office parks and 1200 employees for industrial parks is used.

    Other Commercial. In addition to industrial or office park development, it is anticipated that commercial development beyond the neighborhood level shopping center may occur as well. This category of commercial development is not associated with a planned industrial or office park, but instead may be located in proximity to the new expressway interchanges. These commercial areas may include restaurants, shops and offices, similar to the Ashbrooke Square development which currently exists. A standard employee per acre figure of 25 is used for this analysis. It should be noted that the determination of future space needs for commercial as opposed to employment centers is usually based on projections for retail and office floor space, which in turn is based on economic forecasts for office sector activity, as well as population projections. In the absence of appropriate and reliable data, however, it is reasonable to assume a standard ratio of 25 employees generated per acre of commercial development.

    A comparison of the three land use development scenarios reveals how the acreage needs change when different types of development are used to generate employment, and thereby satisfy employment projections. A rounded figure of 1800 new employees, between the years 1995 and 2020, is used. As mentioned, all scenarios include the neighborhood level shopping center, given the strong need in the area for this type of development. The remaining 1700 employees are generated using a combination of office park or industrial park and other commercial development. Given the large number of employees generated by one office or one industrial park, it is anticipated that only one of these types of developments can be supported in the area. If neither an office nor an industrial park are developed (scenario C), approximately 68 acres of commercial development can be anticipated. The least amount of land area is consumed when the office park land use is included, given the fact that this type of development has the highest employee per acre ratio. Inclusion of a more industrially oriented park consumes the most land. Scenario C, which includes only neighborhood level shopping and commercial development, consumes much less land area than the scenario which includes an industrial park.

    Estimated community facilities requirements

    Instead of incorporating acreage requirements for community facilities as part of a neighborhood acreage requirement (as in tables 16 and 17), acreage requirements for community facilities can be undertaken as a separate analysis. There are many different kinds of facilities that can be considered. Local businesses, particularly neighborhood shops, have already been considered. Other facilities to be considered include schools, recreation and open space; local-serving facilities such as churches, libraries, police and fire stations should also be included in any attempt to assess future development requirements.

    To estimate future development requirements for community facilities, location and sizing principles must be decided upon. In lieu of an assessment of consumer preferences, which is beyond the scope of this document, it is appropriate to simply multiply the future projected population by a predetermined standard. Usually, this standard or level of service is simply a quantity of facilities per capita. The standards used here are taken from the recommendations of professional organizations, such as the National Recreation and Park Association. Obviously, the Cheat Lake community may want to revise these per capita standards in the future to fit their own specific needs (based on, for example, present levels of satisfaction and financial capabilities).

    Once the future facility needs are determined, a community may want to determine an optimal location pattern of facilities. This pattern would be based on community objectives, locational and space requirements, and an analysis of locational suitability. Since the community's objectives are unknown at this point in time, the analysis presented here for schools and other community facilities will focus on the determination of land area requirements.

Schools

    Even though the local school board is involved in planning for new schools, it is appropriate to look at the future land area requirements for schools, associated with the projected population increase. The basic methodology for school planning is to inventory existing capacities, project enrollments, develop location and site requirements, and design a spatial pattern of school sites. Determining local standards for schools sites - service radii, minimum/maximum site size - depends on local development densities and the average number of school-aged children per household. Standards should also be based on participation of a local school planning team. Projecting enrollment involves first projecting population by future school-age composition, and then distributing this enrollment by geographic area. Because an analysis of this depth is beyond the scope of this document, the standards given below and used in the analysis of locational suitability are fairly "boiler plate".7

    For the purposes of this document, a very generalized set of standards for elementary and junior high schools is used, shown in table 20. The table is limited in several respects. First, high schools were not included because of the expanded geographic radius which they serve (the average population served by one high school is 24,000 people, or 3,800 to 4,000 families, well beyond the projected population for the Cheat Lake Area). Another important omission from the table is pre-school facilities - these are dealt with under the community facilities category below. Finally, the desirable and maximum service area radii are not included because, given the low-density nature of residential development in the Cheat Lake Area, published service area radii are not applicable (despite its desirability, a maximum service area radius of .5 miles for an elementary school is not practicable for the Cheat Lake Area). The location of schools in the Cheat Lake Area, along with the school district boundary, are shown in figure 20.

    It is important to note that, if a more in-depth analysis were to be conducted, the assumed population characteristics in table 20 would undoubtedly change. Also, the standards for size of school, population served, and area required would vary depending on local needs and/or objectives.
 

    Using the middle school boundary, and not taking high school enrollment into account, the projected elementary school enrollment by 2020 may, very roughly, reach 2,415 students. Currently, there are two elementary schools in the Cheat Lake Area: Cheat Lake Elementary School, with a capacity of approximately 500 students, and Easton, with a capacity of approximately 200 students. In addition, some students in the Cheat Lake Area, along Canyon Road, are currently being bused out of the area to Woodburn Elementary School in Morgantown.

    Thus the current capacity of approximately 700 elementary school students will, undoubtedly, be greatly exceeded in the coming years. For middle school students, a projected level of approximately 1,035 students by the year 2020 could not be accommodated by the current school, Cheat Lake Middle School (the only middle school in the Cheat Lake Area). The capacity of the middle school has already been exceeded. Future population growth will necessitate the adding of more middle school capacity.

Community Facilities

    A wide range of different types of facilities can be included in this category. The need for various types of community facilities is virtually entirely dependent on the needs and objectives of the local residents of the Cheat Lake Area. This is in contrast to facilities such as transportation routes, sewer and water lines, and schools, which are based on need as well as community objectives, but are not as subjectively determined. Community facilities include the following:

• preschools and day care centers
• neighborhood parks
• community parks
• recreational facilities such as softball fields, soccer fields, tennis courts, pools, etc.
• playgrounds
• libraries
• community centers or buildings available for community functions
• community recreation centers, with indoor facilities such as pools or basketball courts
   

    The need for preschools, day-care centers, and community centers which are not athletically oriented must be determined by the needs of residents. In terms of preschools specifically, if it is assumed that there are 60 children of pre-school age per 1,000 persons (see footnote 7), then it can be estimated that there are approximately 552 preschool aged children in the Cheat Lake Area. Using this same standard, it could be estimated that by the year 2020, 828 children could potentially be in need of pre-school facilities. This does not include the need for day-care facilities. Currently in the Cheat Lake Area, there are facilities to accommodate less than 100 children. Many Cheat Lake Area residents commute to locations in the Morgantown area to find preschool facilities.

    The Cheat Lake Area is also in need of additional library capacity. Currently, the area has one small facility which is inadequate to serve the needs of the existing population. During the last five years, circulation in the library has increased from approximately 26,000 items circulated per year to almost 39,000 items circulated per year, a 50% increase in circulation.8

    Parks and recreational facilities of the type listed above are conspicuously lacking from the Cheat Lake Area. One study which was conducted by the Cheat Lake Environmental and Recreation Alliance (CLEAR), concluded that, based on a survey of local residents, Cheat Lake should greatly expand its opportunities for non-motorized activities, as well as providing protection for wildlife.

    For the purpose of attempting to determine future needs and associated land area requirements for recreational facilities, it is useful to look at existing standards. Since the needs of residents in terms of preschools and other non-athletic oriented facilities is unknown at this time, the analysis in this section will focus on recreational needs which are often seen as fairly standard. These uses and standards are locally oriented, and are intended to cover "close-to-home" recreational opportunities (as opposed to regionally-oriented recreational uses). Again, the specific standards used should ideally be based on locally-determined needs, and not exclusively on the standards published by professional organizations. However, the standards listed here are a useful starting point in the determination of recreational needs in the Cheat Lake Area.

    The most widely cited recreational standards - those published by the National Recreation and Park Association, or NRPA (1996). The NRPA suggests a hierarchical recreational system: minipark, neighborhood park, community park, regional park, etc. Since miniparks are more suited to more developed urban areas, serving small user groups, they are not included here. Regional parks are not included because their service area is much larger in scope than the Cheat Lake Area. Neighborhood and community parks are most applicable to the area, but at least one adjustment to the NRPA standards is necessary at the outset. It must be recognized that neighborhood parks traditionally serve a walking population, something which is not realistic given the type of lowdensity, automobile oriented development found in the Cheat Lake Area. For this purpose, the neighborhood park service area needs to be greatly expanded when analyzing park needs for this area. The larger service area radius of a community park would be more suited to automobile access, and therefore to the type of development found in the Cheat Lake Area.

    For neighborhood and community parks, the table lists a suggested maximum service area, desirable site size, and total acres per 1,000 population. Overall, the NRPA recommends a minimum of 6.25 to 10.5 acres of developed open space per 1,000 population. For the Cheat Lake Area, this equals approximately 58 to 98 acres of developed open space for the current population of the area. Based on the projected (upper limit) population for the year 2020, 86 to 145 acres of developed open space would be needed.

    Currently, the Cheat Lake Area has less than 10 acres of developed open space. These areas consist of the playground, softball fields and soccer fields adjacent to the Cheat Lake Elementary and Middle Schools. With an estimated population of 9,237 in 1995, 10 acres equates to a standard of about 1 acre of developed open space per 1,000 residents, substantially below a standard minimum of 6.25 to 10.5 acres per 1,000 population. In comparison, the City of Morgantown, with an estimated 1995 population of approximately 38,000, has 279 acres of developed open space, or about 7.3 acres per 1,000 population. Obviously, the need for additional developed recreational facilities in the Cheat Lake Area is great, even when measured against a minimum standard.

    Section 3

The Next Step
 

Summary of Development Issues

    The most pressing issue in terms of future development in the Cheat Lake Area is the fact that there are no mechanisms available for environmental or cultural resource protection from new development. Any private development which may occur as a result of the new expressway or associated with population growth is not required to adhere to any standards regarding aesthetics, environmental protection, or other impact which may directly effect the quality of life in the Cheat Lake Area.

Three interrelated issues are prominent when discussing the lack of development

How much growth can/should the Cheat Lake Area sustain?

What impacts on environmental quality should be considered?

What can be done to address service deficiencies?

How much growth?

    Cheat Lake Area residents need to consider how much growth the area can reasonably sustain. Several issues need to be considered. First, new development does not always result in a net increase in jobs or tax revenues, but may instead move jobs and tax revenue from one location to another within the same region. New development that is appropriately sized for the area, that fits in well with its surroundings, and that respects the natural environment makes good economic sense.

    Cheat Lake Area residents should consider carefully whether or not they want unlimited commercial development. Such development could very well take the form of sprawling, "box in the middle of a field" type structures, such as superstores and large discount chains. New growth in the form of commercial development should, ideally, build on the area's existing resources rather than duplicating or destroying existing ones.

    The analysis of residential development has already shown that vacant land in proximity to public sewer lines will not accommodate future growth in the core area.

    Therefore, there will be pressure to look for areas to develop either outside of the core area, away from existing sewer lines, or to convert agricultural land within the existing service areas. Conversion of large tracts of agricultural land is likely to effect the character of the main, core area of Cheat Lake.

    Residents should consider the impact of public facilities, particularly transportation, water, and sewer lines on new development. If new development occurs without benefit of public sewer, the long-term impact on groundwater should be considered. For public facility extension, since the location of utilities greatly influences the location of development, residents should consider whether the undeveloped areas into which these routes or utilities are being extended are the areas which should be developed. Transportation, water and sewer systems are powerful determinants of growth patterns in a region. While, they do not "create" new growth, but rather influence the location of development that would have occurred in the region anyway, their influence on growth patterns should be considered by local residents of Cheat Lake. In terms of immediate impact, the location of transportation and sewer lines in particular will affect the behavior of developers. The residents of Cheat Lake may find it beneficial to have some say in what areas are being "opened up" to new development.

    In order to maintain appropriate levels of growth for the Cheat Lake Area, residents may want to consider the following:

1) New development should be appropriately sized for the area in which it is located.

2) New development should minimize harm to the natural environment.

3) New development should be adequately serviced by public roads, utilities, and facilities.

Environment Quality

    The Cheat Lake Area is beautiful, but there is no denying that there are sections where environmental quality is deteriorating. Without "pointing fingers" at specific locations or property owners, this section will discuss some of the issues involved in the "look" of development. The environmental quality of an area can refer to housing density, design issues, sign control, traffic congestion, and the protection vs. loss of environmental and historic resources. Some of these issues, as they relate specifically to the Cheat Lake Area, are discussed in this section. For the purpose of promoting discussion of these issues, some possible ways to address these development issues are proposed. The way in which these issues are dealt with, or not dealt with, is a matter for the residents of the Cheat Lake Area to decide.

The problem with urban sprawl

    New growth in an otherwise rural or forested area, if left unchecked, can result in serious degradation of the environment. Sprawl is defined as low-density, land-consumptive development geared exclusively to automobile, as opposed to pedestrian traffic. Often, new, unregulated growth in formerly rural areas such as Cheat Lake results in "urban sprawl". The problem with sprawl is that it is characterized by poor accessibility - of workers to jobs, of students to schools, of residents to shopping. In addition, continued sprawl in the Cheat Lake Area will significantly reduce the amount of open space which currently exists in the area. The more sprawl, the less accessibility for residents who live in these areas, and the less open space for the area as a whole. If residents are interested in preserving and protecting the unique natural and historic features of the area, they should consider the detrimental effects of unchecked sprawl.

    If non-residential (i.e., commercial) land uses are allowed to proliferate uncontrolled along the new expressway, roadside sprawl is likely to result. New levels of accessibility will encourage growth along the highway, and, if unregulated, result in a menagerie of commercial, industrial and residential land uses. Unchecked commercial land uses amid residential land uses presents problems, such as traffic congestion and an incongruity of building styles. It should be emphasized that sprawl is not synonymous with economic growth.

    While many residents may favor development with relatively large lot sizes (one-third of an acre or more, per unit), there are some alternative forms of development which residents may want to consider, in view of the consequences of unabated sprawl. To reduce urban sprawl, Cheat Lake Area residents may want to consider implementing some standards regarding new development. These standards have the effect, over the long term, of providing better access and resulting in less loss of open space. Better accessibility to daily activities outside the home translates into higher resident satisfaction and higher quality of life for many residents. The provision of open space, or areas which are protected from sprawling development, has a number of important benefits. Open space which is reserved for natural areas supports wildlife, enhances water quality, recharges groundwater supplies, holds stormwater, provides views, and provides recreational opportunities.9

    Specific ways to promote better accessibility and preserve open space, which local area residents may want to consider, include the following:

1) Develop in small neighborhood clusters, rather than monotonous, sprawling subdivisions. Make new subdivisions into neighborhoods, rather than standard, cookie cutter tract developments. This means providing services for neighborhoods such as parks and neighborhood level shopping. Neighborhoods should also have well-defined centers and well-defined edges. This not only has the benefit of promoting sense of community, but has been shown to be a major factor in crime prevention.

2) Shopping and recreational opportunities should keep pace with housing. As pointed out previously, the lack of services in the Cheat Lake Area is indicative of the situation where residential growth is not in sync with commercial or recreational land uses. Ideally, commercial and recreational facilities should be introduced as early as possible when new areas of Cheat Lake are "opened up" for residential development.

3) Commercial development should be as compact as possible, and not spread in strips. A contiguous and compact pattern of growth should be established where possible. Development projects should be interrelated, not isolated. The lack of any clear pattern of land use and the absence of clearly recognizable places results in a lack of identity as well as a lack of beauty. In addition, scattered commercial areas in commercial strips disrupt throughtraffic as cars pull in and out of individual driveways. This represents a serious compromise to safety as well as street capacity.

4) Encourage mixed-use development. The only long-term solution to traffic congestion is not to provide more and more roads, but to bring housing, shopping and workplaces into closer proximity to each other. One approach to this is to promote mixed-use development. Numerous development organizations, including the Urban Land Institute and the National Association of Home Builders, have espoused the advantages of mixed use development. Some communities require that new shopping be built with housing units above the shops. New office complexes could be encouraged to provide housing and shopping within the same area.

    Figure 21 is an example of a development scheme which incorporates some of these design ideals.

    Aesthetics - regulating non-residendal development

    Thousands of communities across the country promote environmental quality in their area by insisting that new commercial or other non-residential development conform to some criteria with respect to site design and/or architectural quality. Presumably, residents of the Cheat Lake Area are interested in maintaining and creating an attractive physical environment. The area's overall appearance is a major component of the quality of life it offers. Visual quality defines a town's character and reflects how residents view themselves. Messy, unregulated, unsightly development carries the message that people do not care. Good community design should be orderly but still encourage diversity and individual expression.

    The design of commercial development was briefly discussed within the context of urban sprawl. This is an issue which many residents in other communities have rallied behind, because it not only makes good environmental sense to regulate commercial development, but it makes good economic sense as well. Orderly commercial development is far more attractive to potential customers than is random, unregulated commercial sprawl. Linear or strip commercial development along rural highways is a common occurrence, but it is often characterless and unsightly.

    In many areas of Cheat Lake, commercial development is intermixed with residential uses in a haphazard, unattractive way, looking more like the result of a train wreck than a well thought out, logical arrangement of land uses. Random commercial development, placed on site as a single architectural entity unrelated to its surroundings, results in vast zones of "in between and nowhere". Commercial development should not be laid out in a random manner, without regard to site characteristics.

    There are alternatives; economic growth in Cheat Lake does not have to result in unsightly roadside sprawl. Cheat Lake Area residents may want to consider the following approaches to curbing characterless sprawl:

1) Instead of commercial strips, encourage the development of clusters of retail and office development. Buildings should be close to the street with parking behind, not in front. This approach preserves open space, but still maintains the overall density developments require. Cluster development also avoids the problem of having isolated, individual architectural statements that relate only to themselves.

    2) Cheat Lake Area residents should consider the benefits of creating scenic greenbelts and permanent open space areas which are protected from development. Greenbelts are parcels of land adjacent to roads, lakes or rivers, within which signs and buildings are discouraged. A greenbelt along the proposed expressway may be particularly beneficial. Not only would it provide an absorption area for sound, noise and fumes, but it would reduce the amount of visual clutter associated with highway interchange development.

    In addition, many areas implement sign control, in an effort to avoid the "Mcdonaldization" of the environment. Change puts pressure on an area's appearance, and unless some control of signage is implemented, large signs that block views of the countryside will proliferate.

Service deficiencies

Neighborhood shopping, neighborhood perks, neighborhood schools

    It has already been noted throughout this document that the Cheat Lake Area is lacking in some basic services. In particular, the area could easily support increased shopping opportunities and recreational facilities. The area will undoubtedly need additional elementary schools and parks in the near future.

    In effect, commercial, recreational, and other non-residential land use developments have not kept pace with residential growth in the Cheat Lake Area. By planning for needed increases in non-residential uses, the service deficiency which currently exists can be corrected. In terms of needed non-public uses such as grocery stores, Cheat Lake Area residents could facilitate their development by demonstrating need and showing that residents care about the future direction of development in the area. The more residents "plan" for future development, the safer developers feel in committing funds toward new development. Areas which are planned significantly lower the risk for new development, because developers have a better idea of what to expect.

Public Utlities

    Public facilities and services, such as water and sewer, should be provided in a way that promotes balanced growth and distributes costs according to benefits received. As has been stated previously, the impact of new public utilities on opening up new development should be considered in the Cheat Lake Area. Opening up new areas of development should be balanced against fiscal, social and environmental cost.

Postcript:  A Word About Land Use Regulations

    Many of the ideas presented in this document rest on the idea that local residents should "take control" of the future destiny of the Cheat Lake Area. In turn, this notion is fueled by the idea that land use regulations are a proper and necessary function of communities (i.e., local governments or quasi-governments re