Coshocton County Strategic Land-Use Planning Committee Preliminary Reports
Land Use Power Point Presentation
Mission
Statement
Use a citizen-based
approach and educational process to develop a Comprehensive
Land Use Plan for Coshocton County. By encouraging the
involvement of Coshocton County citizens, the plan reflects
a cross-section of ideas and values. The desired outcome
is to have a planning document that reflects the consensus
of the participants for future land use decisions.
Coshocton Land Use Committee Vision Statement
Coshocton
County will be comprised of vibrant communities, productive farms,
and valuable natural and cultural resources and a well maintained
land use pattern that will:
- Be an appealing place to live, work, and visit.
- Create and maintain an environment that acknowledges and respects age and cultural diversities.
- Enhance and maintain farms and forests as working resources.
- Preserve and enhance open spaces, natural areas, streams, rivers, and cultural resources.
- Foster, encourage and oversee structured growth within identified areas of infrastructure.
- Offer a range of economic
opportunities, together with a viable travel and tourism industry,
a healthy environment and effective public services for all citizens.
Agricultural Sub-Committee
Committee Chair: Wendell Waters
Committee Members: George Eberwine, Jim Schumaker, Steve Finton, Evangeline
Croft, David Gilmore, Adrian Garber, Garry Derr, Rhoda Crown, and Teresa Bradford.
Introduction and Historical Background:
A land use survey of Coshocton County was completed by the Planning Consultant in the Summer of 1968 in conjunction with the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan. The survey showed that land used for agricultural purposes, or which is essentially undeveloped, accounts for about 89 percent of the County’s total 362,250 acres. Other types of development including recreation areas, strip mines, rights of way and all urban development, utilize the remaining 39,350 acres or 11 percent of the land. In 1970 Comprehensive Plan there were 90,000 acres of land in cropland, 75,000 acres in pasture and 149,000 acres in forest. In addition to the Woodbury Wildlife Area and the large areas of raw land, there are many other less known areas of scenic beauty throughout the County.
The 1970 Plan concluded – The growth of average farm size and the use of modern technology have contributed to the development of a strong commercial base in the agricultural sector of Coshocton County. The strength of this base has meant the continuing importance of agricultural sector of Coshocton County. The strength of this base has meant the continuing importance of agricultural activity to the County economy. At the same time, the number of agricultural workers required to produce the increasing sales levels has declined thus increasing the potential labor force available to other sectors of the economy. It was anticipated that by 1990, the number of agricultural jobs in Coshocton County will have decreased to between 750 and 1000.
In 1982, the Coshocton Soil and Water Conservation District and USDA, Soil Conservation Service completed a Natural Resources Inventory for Coshocton County Land Use. The report indicated the following: Cropland 101,500 acres; pastureland 65,600 acres; forest land 152,200 acres, urban land 9,600 acres and other land 32,500 acres. The report also indicated Coshocton County has about 57,000 acres of prime farmland. Prime Farmland soils are defined as the best suited to producing food, fiber, forage, feed and oilseed crops. Prime farmland soils produce the highest yields with the minimal inputs of energy and economic resources. Farming these soils results in the least damage to the environment.
Please see the attached table showing Coshocton County – Census of Agriculture
Vision and Goals:
The Agricultural Task Force is dedicated to the Vision of:
• Preserving Prime Farmland
• Promoting agricultural value of Prime Farmland to competing land users and decision makers
• Making it a priority that agricultural operations be:
- Economically sustainable
- Environmentally sustainable
- Socially acceptable to the community
The Agricultural Task Force established the following Goals to provide direction for future land use changes and insure that those changes are made so that strong economic gains are achieved.
Goal 1: “Smart Development” in Coshocton County
STRATEGY
• Insure cooperation with the local Soil and Water Conservation District to provide soil and water evaluation, and that those factors can support the proposed land change needs. This information would help form regulation guidelines for Health board representatives. Realtors, banking interests, and other planning agencies.
• Protection and preservation of prime land for agricultural production is greatly facilitated by encouraging and maintaining cooperation and coordination among political subdivisions - Municipalities, townships, and counties can best help reserve farmland by working together and by using a comprehensive land use plan. (See attached map with prime and important farmland)
• It is important not to facilitate development by extending water and sewer lines into areas of prime agricultural land. Homeowners and businesses who plan to build commonly follow the extension of infrastructure into rural areas. However, if it is deemed necessary to extend infrastructure into areas of prime agricultural land, this should be undertaken as carefully as possible in order to minimize resulting negative impacts on agricultural activity.
• Choose residential building standards which discourages excessive lot sizes. This would help reduce the amount of farmland being used for residential purposes.
• Clustered development for residential housing deserves serious consideration. Such dwellings, nucleated in a small area or agglomeration, use less land, keep houses at a distance from farm operations, reduce the amount of necessary infrastructure, and cause less disruption to and impact upon the overall landscape.
Goal 2: Green Space Protection
STRATEGY
• Prime land for agricultural production should be encouraged, preserved and protected to the maximum extent by utilizing all possible and applicable incentives. One method to preserve prime farmland includes maintaining, extending and creating new agricultural districts in which agricultural activity, even within urban systems, is taxed at a lower rate than urban land use activities. Another method is to implement the recent legislation that allows local governments to purchase development rights from farmers. In these ways agriculture can continue as a valued and productive way of life and major feature of landscape.
• Encourage landowners to enroll in the Ag District designation
• Work to establish a reclamation plan for former gravel and mining areas to create recreational areas for hunting, fishing and other recreational opportunities.
• Establish guidelines to prevent former mining areas from being converted into possible less favorable commercial uses: i.e. “landfills”
Goal 3: Provide Adequate Transportation Opportunities Under Changing Major Highway Layout
STRATEGY
• As the major highway system is restructured to allow faster movement for automobile and truck traffic, secondary roads should be provided to allow efficient access to agricultural and commercial areas.
Agricultural Task Force Summary
Progress of the agriculture committee has centered on the evaluation of current agricultural resources. Committee members have evaluated census data since 1980 noting a relatively stable number of farms (1050 to 930) with median farm size changing from 195 to 182 acres. The cash receipts per farm rose from only $22,000 to $40,000. These figures include part-time farmers and hobby farmers. These statistics alone cannot be used to measure the economic viability of agriculture in Coshocton County to the commercial farmer.
Our committee has greatly benefited from the information available at the Coshocton Soil and Water Conservation District Office. Maps are available which designate the prime and important soils within our county (see attached). USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service by request of the Coshocton SWCD and Coshocton County Commissioners recently completed the Coshocton Soil Survey. The Soil Survey provides detailed predictions of soil behavior for selected land uses and highlights soil limitations, improvements needed to overcome limitations, an the impact of selected land uses on the environment. The Agricultural Task Force encourages all public officials to use this valuable information in assessing the adaptability of land for it intended use.
An effective land use plan addresses and incorporates all significant local issues and priorities, but must also be based on the land and it natural resources. Land use planning is both a social science and physical and biological science. Failure to consider the natural environment can result in cost overruns, increased runoff and flooding, environment degradation, construction delays, and expensive planning mistakes.
The USDA-NRCS has at the request of the Coshocton Soil and Water Conservation District provided a list of soil map units reflecting those soil types of significant influence on our local agriculture economy. If a plan of farmland preservation would be adopted, these soil map units would help in qualifying or not qualifying land for this purpose. (See attached map showing prime and important soils of Coshocton County).
It is the hope and intent of the Agricultural Task Force to forestall the loss of agriculture land for non-agriculture purposes. Examples would be gravel pits, coal mining, unrestricted housing developments, and in general the urban sprawl that is so prevalent in today’s environment.
Efforts still are needed to develop written documentation supporting farmland preservation. Gravel removal is seen as a major detriment to retaining prime farmland and the aesthetics of major areas within our County.
Back to Top
Cultural Resources Sub-Committee
Chair: Paul Prater
Vision Statement:
To maintain and enhance the cultural experiences within Coshocton County. Exploring the past with a view towards the future.
Narrative on the County
In the westernmost reaches of the Appalachian foothills, two rivers have carved their converging paths to form a third, larger valley that channels their waters first to the Ohio, then to the Mississippi and, finally, the Gulf of Mexico.
The names of the three rivers - Walhounding, Tuscarawas, Muskingum - and the name, "Coshocton," as well, are reminders that, in centuries past, the area that is now Coshocton County was a center of Indian culture and was once the capital of the Delaware nation.
Throughout the centuries, man has traveled these valleys - by canoe and by horseback, then by wagon, canal boat, railroad and now by motor vehicle and in the air.
During the Indian's residence, the rivers were their highways through virgin forests so dense they kept the creatures of the woods in semi-darkness from spring to fall.
In the autumn of 1764, the valley was the path for some two thousand British soldiers and Lieutenant Colonel Henry Bouquet who came to secure the release of more than two hundred settlers who had been held prisoner by the Indian tribes then waging the Pontiac War.
During the mid-1800's, Irish and German immigrants scraped the Ohio-Erie Canal out of the valley floor. The "Big Ditch," which connected the Great Lakes to the Ohio River, would bring to the valley the sixth President of the United States, John Quincy Adams.
Later in the century, railroads came into the valley, also following the rivers' natural excavations. Ironically, canal boats carried the rails to build the roadbeds for the next generation of transportation - one that would render the canal itself obsolete.
Trees still line these fertile valleys, providing a haven for the abundant wildlife that has flourished here since before the Indians' reign. The vigorous commercial ventures of those who now call Coshocton County home also flourish.
From the website of http://www.snowcrest.net/~mikennancy/finneygen/cosh.html
Unique Community Events
Ice Carving Festival
Tiverton Institute
Dogwood Festival
Hot Air Balloon Festival
Dulcimer Days
Coshocton Canal Festival
Coshocton County Fair
Apple Butter Stirrin’
Fall Foliage & Farm Tour
Festival of Trees
Christmas Candle Lighting
Other Cultural Activities in Coshocton County
Pomerene Center for the Arts
Johnson Humrickhouse Museum
Triple Locks Theatre
Coshocton County Library System
Community Choirs
House of Jacob Headquarters
Buildings listed on the National Register of Historical Places in Coshocton County
Demographic Profile Sub-Committee
Committee Chair: Catherine Miller
Our report will follow the outline listed below. It will provide for as much of the factual statistics and projections that is available as of this time.
I. Map of Ohio with a star on Coshocton County
II. Map of Coshocton County with each Township designated
III. History of Coshocton County (narrative format)
IV. Regional Structure:
A. Surrounding Counties (specific features relevant to Coshocton County)
B. Accessibility to metropolitan areas
C. Population
1. townships
2. vital statistics
3. trends (historical, township, household, employment)
4. population characteristics (income, socio-economic, age, racial/ethnic, residency, school, educational attainment, ancestry, labor force, occupation, households)
population projections (general)
Regional Context
This section will focus on the regional perspective relative to Coshocton County. This presentation will address population of the counties and the economic trends which would be relative to Coshocton County.
Regional Structure
Coshocton County is located in the east-central portion of the state. US 36 & 16 and SR 541 cross the county east and west and State Routes 60, 83, 93 & 206 run north and south. State Route 83 connects with Interstate 70, about 20 miles south of Coshocton. SR 83 also connects with US 36, now being linked with the new 4-lane highway to Interstate 77, about 20 miles east of Coshocton, and SR 83 connects with SR 16 one mile west of the county’s industrial park.
Coshocton, one of 88 counties in Ohio, is ranked 67th in population according to the 2000 census. Coshocton is not a part of a metropolitan area. (A metropolitan area as defined by the 2000 census of population and housing is an area comprised of a large urbanized area with a population of one million or more that would have significant economic and social interrelationship to the immediate area). Therefore, the closest metropolitan area to Coshocton County is the Columbus area. With the East-West corridor passing through Coshocton County, Columbus is within approximately 1½ hours driving time. The Cleveland-Akron metropolitan area is within approximately 2 1/4 to 2 ½ hours driving time. These metropolitan areas provide more social relationships to our county (arts, shopping, major sporting events, etc.) than an immediate economic impact because of driving distances for day to day employment.
The counties surrounding Coshocton are as follows: Tuscarawas county to the east, Holmes to the north, Muskingum to the south, Knox to the nothwest. Small sections of our county touch Guernsey to the south east and Licking to the west.
Population
The 2000 census listed the population of these surrounding counties as 462,969. Coshocton contributed 36,655 persons (7.3 percent) to this regional population making a total of 499,624 persons in the seven county area. Coshocton county ranks 7th in this regional area.
Table 1.1
Regional Population Change
1990 2000 Actual Percent
County Population Population Change Change
Coshocton 35,427 36,665 1,238 3.5
Guernsey 39,024 40,792 1,768 4.5
Holmes 32,849 38,943 6,094 18.6
Knox 47,473 54,500 7,027 14.8
Licking 128,300 145,491 17,191 13.4
Muskingum 82,068 84,585 2,517 3.1
Tuscarawas 84,090 90,914 6824 8.1
Source: Office of Strategic Research, Ohio Department of Development, 2000
Population
Historic trends
This section begins with a review of population trends for Coshocton County over the past 50 years. It will include individual township population over the past decade as well as findings on housing and employment.
Population
The net population change in Coshocton County from 1950 to 2000 was 5,514 which is an increase of 17.7 %. The greatest growth increase occurred between 1970 and 1980. The rate of growth has been rather stagnant since 1980, even a decrease from 1980-1990. It is interesting to note that the growth for the state of Ohio was a 42.9 % increase for the period of time from 1950 to 2000. (Population in 1950 for Ohio was 7,946,627 and the 2000 population was 11,353,140).
Table 2.1
Population trends over past 50 years for Coshocton County
Year Coshocton County Actual Change Percent Change
1950 31,141 ----- -----
1960 32,224 1,083 3.5
1970 33,486 1,262 3.9
1980 36,024 2,538 7.6
1990 35,427 (597) (1.7)
2000 36,655 1,228 3.5
Source: Ohio Department of Development Office of Strategic Research, 2000
The actual population by townships from 1990-2000 indicates growth in 20 of 22 townships. This excludes Coshocton City which had a decrease in population of 511 persons (12,193 in the 1990 census to 11,682 in the 2000 census) for a 4.2% decrease. The following table illustrates the change in population for the townships of the county for the last decade.
Table 2.2
Township population from 1990 to 2000
Actual Percent
Township 1990 census 2000 census Change Change
Adams 595 755 160 26.8
Bedford 499 601 102 20.4
Bethlehem 1,163 1,191 28 2.4
Clark 578 594 16 2.8
Crawford 1,221 1,594 373 30.5
Franklin 1,376 1,286 (90) (6.5)
Jackson 1,947 2,045 98 5.0
Jefferson 1,383 1,549 166 12.0
Keene 1,583 1,689 106 6.7
Lafayette 4,140 4,285 145 3.5
Linton 611 632 21 3.4
Mill Creek 540 747 207 38.3
Monroe 399 452 53 13.3
Newcastle 387 441 54 13.9
Oxford 1,512 1,560 48 3.2
Perry 408 513 105 25.7
Pike 411 550 139 33.8
Tiverton 291 348 57 19.6
Tuscarawas 2,151 1,798 (353) (16.4)
Virginia 525 636 111 21.1
Washington 533 629 96 18.0
White Eyes 981 1,078 97 9.9
Source: Factfinder.US Census.gov
A overall view of the population would indicate that households are moving to the rural area away from the industrialized areas. The opening of the North corridor will tend to increase significant population numbers to the north and east, especially with the opening of Summerfields and Walnut Hills Estate. One would expect a definite increase in Keene township.
Housing
The total housing units for Coshocton County in the 1990 census was 14,964. The 2000 census showed the number of housing units as 16,107 for an increase of 7.6 % over the past decade. The largest percentage of housing units over the last 50 years was in the decade of the 70's to the 80's when the increase was 15.7 %. This increase directly coincides with the population increase during that time frame. The number of mobile homes in the 2000 census was 2,625 units which accounted for 16.3 % of the total housing units. One-unit, detached accounted for 71.6 % of the total housing units. The remaining 12.1 % accounts for 2 or more units in one complex.
Employment
Civilian Labor Force is comprised of civilians 16 years of age and over who are working or seeking work. It excludes military personnel, persons in institutions, those studying or keeping house full-time, persons who are retired or unable to work and volunteer workers.
The 2000 annual civilian labor force estimates for Coshocton County were: total labor force - 17,500, employment - 16,600, unemployment -900, and unemployment rate - 5.0. Coshocton County ranked thirty-second in unemployment among Ohio’s 88 counties.
Table 2.3 Employment by Industry
In 2000, the total employment for all industries in Coshocton County was 13,390 with the Manuafacturing industry claiming the largest portion-31.5 percent.
Source: Ohio Department of Development prepared by the Office of Strategic Research, 2000
Table 2.4 Labor Market Information for the past 30 years for Coshocton County
Civilian
Labor Unemployment
Year Force Employment Unemployment Rate
1970 15,000 14,300 700 4.7
1980 16,300 15,400 1,000 5.9
1990 16,000 14,900 1,100 6.9
2000 17,400 16,100 1,300 7.7
2003 16,700 ` 15,300 1,400 8.6
Source: Labor Market Information.state.oh.us as of January, 2003
Income
Per Capita Personal Income*
In 2000, Coshocton had a per capita personal income (PCPI) of $21,898. This PCPI ranked 58th in the State, and 78 percent of the State average $27,977. In 1990, the PCPI of Coshocton was $14,440 and ranked 63rd in the State. The average annual growth rate of PCPI over the past 10 years was 4.3 per cent while the average growth rate for the State was 4.1 percent. 717 families in Coshocton county were reported below the poverty level (5.0%). The state percentage below poverty level was 5.3 %.
Table 2.5 Household Income for 1999 as reported on the 2000 census
Coshocton State of
Category County Percent Ohio Percent
No. of Households 14,344 4,446,621
Less than $10,000 1,355 9.5 406,698 9.1
$10,000 to $14,999 1,153 8.0 285,372 6.4
$15,000 to $24,999 2,340 16.3 594,143 13.4
$25,000 to $34,999 2,391 16.7 602,996 13.6
$35,000 to $49,999 2,745 19.1 771,129 17.3
$50,000 to $74,999 2,657 18.5 905,323 20.4
$75,000 to $99,999 1,089 7.6 444,599 10.0
$100,000 to $149,999 445 3.1 289,049 6.5
$150,000 to $199,999 100 0.7 71,062 1.6
$200,000 or more 69 0.5 76,250 1.7
Source: factinder.census.gov 2000 cen
Total Personal Income*
In 2000, TPI (total personal income) ranked Coshocton County 66th in the State of Ohio and accounted for 0.3 percent of the State total. In 1990, the TPI ranked Coshocton County 65th in the State. The average annual growth rate of TPI over the past 10 years for Coshocton County was 4.6 percent. The average annual growth rate for the State was 4.5 % and for the Nation was 5.5 %.
Earnings by Industry*
The largest industry for Coshocton County in 2000 was nondurable goods manufacturing, 19.2 percent of earnings; services, 18.9 percent; and durable goods manufacturing, 16.2 percent. In 1990, the largest industries were nondurable goods manufacturing, 26.8 percent of earnings; durable goods manufacturing; 16.1 percent; and services, 15.2 percent. Of the industries that accounted for at least 5 percent of earnings in 2000, the slowest growing from 1990 to 2000 was nondurable goods manufacturing, which increased at an average annual rate of 0.9 percent; the fastest was services, which increased at an average annual rate of 6.6 percent.
*oh.profiles.iastat.edu/bearfacts from the Regional Economic Information System
POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS
The following describes the general population of Coshocton County. Data were gathered from the 1990 and 2000 Census of Population and Housing. These data were analyzed to determine descriptive attributes of the population, such as age, racial composition, school enrollment, educational attainment, and ancestry.
Overview
The 2000 population in Coshocton County was reported as 36,655. The urban population accounted for approximately 34.4 percent and the rural population was approximately 65.6 percent. Residents classified in the farm population totaled about 6.2 percent. The male population accounted for 48.8 percent(17,905) and the female population was 51.2 percent (18,750). Coshocton County compares quite closely to the state with regard to percentages of persons in the various age categories. The state population (11,363,140) of male/female percentages is also very close to Coshocton County. The state male population (368,070) comprises 48.5 % of the population while the female population (399,532) is 51.5%.
It is interesting to note that the percentages of persons 60 to 85 and over is 2.4 % higher for Coshocton County than the state of Ohio.
Age
Table 3.1 summarizes the age groups in Coshocton County as well as for the State of Ohio for 2000.
Table 3.1
2000 Age Characteristics
Coshocton State
Age County Percent of Ohio Percent
Under 5 2,351 6.4 753,172 6.6
5-9 2,620 7.1 816,215 7.2
10-14 2,848 7.9 831,032 7.3
15-19 2,800 7.6 804,052 7.1
20-24 1,848 5.0 736,929 6.5
25-34 4,365 11.9 1,513,761 13.3
35-44 5,661 15.4 1,822,236 16.1
45-54 5,066 13.8 1,560,185 13.7
55-59 1,900 5.2 554,342 4.9
60-64 1,821 5.0 453,121 4.0
65-74 2,860 7.8 796,240 7.0
75-84 1,936 5.3 539,990 4.8
85 and over 579 1.6 131,865 1.5
Coshocton County Median Age 37.8
Source: Factfinder.census.gov. 2000Census
Racial Composition
Coshocton county’s racial composition was predominately white, including 97.4 % (35,685) of all persons.
Black or African-American accounted for 1.1% (399) of the county’s population.
American Indian and Alaska Native - 0.2% (62).
Asian and the Pacific Islanders - 0.4 % (128)
Hispanic- 0.6 % (216)
Other - 0.3 % (165)
School Enrollment
Persons three years and over are included in the school enrollment characteristics. The breakdown of the age categories in the 1990 census varies from the 2000 census. This makes it difficult to do a comparison; however, the 1990 census shows approximately 82.3 % of the total enrollment in the kindergarten/elementary/high school category. The 2000 census shows 83.7% in that same age population. The State of Ohio percentage in that category is 71.6 %. School enrollment for the kindergarten/elementary/high school category in Coshocton County is 12 % higher than the state. Coshocton County percentages are higher in all categories except college. The new branch college in Coshocton should help the county show an increase in this category. Also noted, more students were enrolled in private schools at the state level. From my research, this enrollment does not necessarily address home schooling.
Table 3.2 2000 School Enrollment Characteristics*
Coshocton Category State of Category
Categories County Per Cent Ohio Per Cent
Enrolled in school 8,641 3,014,460
Nursery School, 648 7.5 204,086 6.8
Preschool
Kindergarten 501 5.8 163,537 5.5
Elementary School 4,562 52.8 1,349,361 44.7
Grades 1-8
High School 2,172 25.1 645,083 21.4
Grades 9-12
College Enrollment 758 8.8 539,392 17.9
Graduate, Professional --- ----- 113,001 3.7
* Actual figures are approximate
Source: Factfinder.census.gov. (School Enrollment)
Education
Educational attainment characteristics have been collected from the 1990 and 2000 census. Persons 25 years and older are included in this data. The data found that those with a high school diploma dominated the educational classifications at both the Coshocton County and state level. Coshocton County shows one half of the population with only a high school diploma while the state shows a little over one third. Coshocton County’s percentage increased in the ten year decade from 1990 to 2000. Table 3.3 shows a percentage comparison for Coshocton County between 1990 and 2000.
Table 3.3 Educational attainment characteristics for Coshocton County (Age 25 and over population)
Category 1990 Percent 2000 Percent
Less than a H.S. diploma 6,559 28.7 5,148 21.3
High School graduate 10,968 47.9 12,356 51.1
Some college-no degree 2,679 11.7 3,209 13.3
Associate degree 809 3.5 1,093 4.5
Bachelor’s degree 1,309 5.7 1,533 6.4
Graduate or Professional 554 2.4 833 3.4
Degree
Source: Factfinder.census.gov. 1990 & 2000 census
The following table shows a comparison between Coshocton county and the state percentages as taken from the data of the 2000 census.
Table 3.4 Educational attainment characteristics for Coshocton County and the State of Ohio (Age 25 and over population)
Category Coshocton Percent Ohio Percent
Less than a H.S.diploma 5,148 21.3 1,262,085 17.0
High School graduate 12,356 51.1 2,674,551 36.1
Some college-no degree 3,209 13.3 1,471,964 19.9
Associate degree 1,093 4.5 439,608 5.9
Bachelor’s degree 1,533 6.4 1,016,256 13.7
Graduate or Professional 833 3.4 547,275 7.4
Degree
Source: Factfinder.census.gov. 2000 census
Ancestry
Of the 36,655 Coshocton County residents, the highest percentage responded as being of German background (24.5 %). The majority (36,187 persons or 98.7 %) were born in the United States. Resident population of 5 years and older were questioned regarding language spoken in the home. Responses indicated that 32,007 persons or 93.3 % spoke only English.
Table 3.5 2000 Ancestry Characteristics
Ancestry Number Percent
German 8,993 24.5
U.S. or America 5,282 14.4
Irish 3,751 10.2
English 3,689 10.1
French (except Basque)755 2.1
Italian 682 1.9
Miscellaneous/ 13,503 36.8
Other Ancestries
Source: Factfinder.census.gov
POPULATION PROJECTIONS
Population projections for Coshocton County were released by the Ohio Department of Development in July, 2003 for the years from 2000 through 2030. The projections for the county continue to be indicative of the historical trends from 1950-2000, that of stability. Coshocton will likely experience very slow growth over the next 30 years. This projected population is only a 2.6% increase over the 30 year period. Table 4.1 will show this slow increase.
Table 4.1 Population projections for Coshocton County
Year Population % Change
2000 36655
2005 36890 .6% I
2010 37070 .5% I
2015 37420 .9% I
2020 37700 .7% I
2025 37820 .3% I
2030 37610 .6% D
Source: Ohio Department of Development Office of Strategic Research, July, 2003
Though Coshocton county’s population is expected to remain stable, the county will experience a larger share of residents who reach 65 or older. In the year 2000, the population of age 65 and over was 5,380. Table 4.2 shows the projection for this age group.
Table. 4.2 Population projection for age 65 and older.
Year Population % Change
2000 5380
2005 5520 2.6% I
2010 5580 1.0% I
2015 6070 8.8% I
2020 6650 9.6% I
2025 7370 10.8% I
2030 7740 5.0%I
Source: Ohio Department of Development, Office of Strategic Research, July, 2003
This amounts to an increase of 43.8% over the 30 year time frame for this age group.
For this same time frame, the opposite end of the spectrum age (0-9), there is a projected decrease of 7 %. Table 4.3 shows this data.
Table 4.3 Population projections for age 9 and under.
Year Projections % Change
2000 4970
2005 4690 5.6% D
2010 4540 3.2% D
2015 4860 7.0% I
2020 4950 1.9% I
2025 5020 1.4% I
2030 4620 8.0% D
Source: Ohio Department of Development, Office of Strategic Research, July, 2003.
The projected population of aged persons versus ages 0 - 9 is typical since the general population is living longer.
As one takes a look at the individual townships from 1960 through 2000, there are slight increases in all townships except Tuscarawas and Jackson. The census records noted this was due largely to the annexation of parts of this territory to Coshocton City. Much of the village of West Lafayette (largest incorporated village in the county) had a 57% increase due to the annexation of surrounding areas of this village. The remaining incorporated villages in the county (Conesville, Nellie, Plainfield, and Warsaw) showed an insignificant amount of population change.
These projections could change as the north corridor develops. Water lines from the Village of West Lafayette to Route 36 could also have an impact on development and population increase.
IMPORTANT ISSUES TO BE CONSIDERED
The following are key points regarding demographics. The population changes do affect housing, employment, health issues, education, and economic trends.
Back to Top
Economic Development Sub-Committee
Committee Chairs: Paul Prater and Dick Totsch
Committee Members:
Vision Statement of the Economic Development Committee:
To Assist in providing an economic stimulus that will provide for and encourage employment, travel and tourism, and agricultural growth for the betterment of Coshocton County.
Coshocton County has a rich history of agriculture, tourism and industry. The county developed along its rivers and canals. Agriculture has played a major role in its development and still does today. Industrial and commercial facilities have developed, expanded with some leaving and others continuing to prosper.
Coshocton County Today
Coshocton County today has a solid agricultural, tourism and industrial base which provides a stable economy for the county. In looking at today from a perspective of development of the commercial and industrial base the following are some observations:
The Economic Development Committee looked at Coshocton County township by township. South of the City of Coshocton there are many locations with have underground mines some are marked, some are not. (See county map)
Flood plain areas around the three rivers in the county and behind the Mohawk and Willscreek Dams limit development in these areas. The Woodbury Wildlife preserve encompasses 19,000 acres in the west central part of the county.
The townships in the county without access to state routes or water and sewer will not be able to support industry or large commercial development. They will develop as small rural type agricultural enterprises or bedroom communities to the other more developed areas.
Water and sewer access in the North Corridor will feed expansion of the airport, Summerfields retirement community and other projects such as light industrial or commercial development. Highway access in this area is also excellent.
Tuscarawas Township, Pleasant Valley Area we see annexation into the city of Coshocton and light and heavy industrial development. This area has access to rail, power, natural gas, highways and is also located near to 2 trucking companies.
Lafayette township, we envision light industrial development possibly at the old Penn-Michigan site or with the extension of water and sewer to the areas adjacent to the Village of West Lafayette and extending East to State Route 751. Water already has been extended North along State Route 93 crossing under Route 36.
The Northwestern part of the county is bordered by Holmes County and there is a growing Amish population. We see development of agriculture, tourism and small entrepreneurial operations.
We envision agriculture as an important part of our county and the need for a land fill may need to be addressed.
All development: industrial commercial, residential etcetera may require that zoning play a very important part in the future, which we as a committee recommend as development increases.
Back to Top
Environmental Resources Sub-Committee
Committee Chair: Donna R. Young
“A Native American Proverb says “We have not inherited the Earth from our fathers, we are borrowing it from our children.” The water, soil, minerals, forests, and wildlife of our county need to be understood and the quality protected for future generations.”
INTRODUCTION
Covering 564 square miles and 22 townships Coshocton County is located in the east-central unglaciated portion of Eastern Ohio. With a mean elevation of 1,100 to 1,200 feet above sea level, Holmes, Tuscarawas, Guernsey, Muskingum, Licking, and Knox counties border the county. Created in 1810 from Muskingum County, the word Coshocton is a derivative of an Indian word meaning, "union of waters". The quality of life in Coshocton County continues to be closely related to the quality of our native environment. The proper use and management of our air, land, and water resources are necessary to maintain our physical, social, and economic well being. Our relationships to the use of these physical elements comprise the key land use issues of environmental quality.
In considering future land use possibilities and alternatives, affect on the physical environment and utilization of natural resources is of significant importance. Much of Coshocton’s social and economic development has been and continues to be determined by its natural resources. The effects of natural processes and human activities--floods, water pollution, mining, and urbanization--on the natural resources are important to understand because these processes and activities, to a large degree, affect the health, safety, and well-being of the citizens, the economy, and the environment of the county.
Effective management of environmental resources requires current and accurate information that can be used to evaluate and recognize possible land use changes affecting the local ecosystems. High quality information is necessary to identify and respond to these trends. Today, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are being used to ensure that rational and ecologically sound decisions are made concerning resource development, impact mitigation, environmental monitoring and other environmental management issues pertaining to land use management. GIS can evaluate land and resource use alternatives while considering potential environmental and cultural resource impacts, economic implications, and potential use conflicts.
Coshocton County Ground-Water Resources: (See map )
Of the many natural resources available, water has always been crucial to Coshocton County’s growth and economic status dating back to our historical beginnings in the early 1800’s. Groundwater is water naturally stored below ground surface, in broken rock, gravel, or other permeable material. Coshocton County is comprised of parts of several geologic formations. The aquifers in these formations yield various quantities of water, and recharge at different rates. Many types of land uses depend on groundwater, including agriculture and industry, the city of Coshocton, villages of West Lafayette, Warsaw, and individual residences.
Three main aquifers provide ground water for Coshocton County. The unconsolidated coarse-grained sand and gravel aquifer is the most productive, and is located in the river valleys that cut through the center of the county from east to west and from northwest to southeast. Yields of 100 to 1000 gallons per minute (gpm) or more are obtainable from the thick permeable deposits of sand and gravel beneath the flood plains adjacent to the Muskingum River, and are also located in a portion of Wakatomika Creek. The ancient drainage channel beneath the Muskingum River from Coshocton to Dresden is filled with as much as 135 feet of coarse deposits of sand, gravel, boulders, and thin layers of clay. Proven yields of as much as 1500 gpm have been developed in the vicinity of Conesville. In the southeastern portion of the county, including the Plainfield area, yields up to 100 gpm are possible from valley fill material containing sand and gravel deposits. Scattered throughout the county, the sandstone, shale, and limestone aquifers offer limited yields that range from 25gpm to less than 3 gpm. Specific information on ground-water availability and wells can be obtained by contacting ODNR Division of Water.
Runoff and sediment from residential development, construction sites, and agricultural lands may enter the county's streams and lakes. Also, runoff may carry other pollutants, such as lawn and agricultural chemicals (pesticides and fertilizers), effluent from septic systems, oil and gas from spills, and industrial wastes.
Ground water is a major water source for rural households in Coshocton County. Approximately 47 percent of all households obtain their water from private wells and developed springs. Based on an estimated usage of 75 gallons per person per day, 1,260,525 gpd from private wells and developed springs are used. Other private water uses include industry (95 million gpd) and livestock use (0.39 million gpd), which are mostly from ground-water supplies. In addition, the Muskingum River provides approximately 260 million gpd of surface water for thermoelectric-power cooling purposes at the Columbus Southern Power Generating Plant in Conesville. The remaining 53 percent of households use public-water supplies that use ground water as the source.
.
Water Use in Coshocton County, Ohio.1
Public Water System Population Served Primary Water Source Water Usage (GPD)2 Treatment Plant Capacity (GPD)
Coshocton 14,538 Ground Water 6,810,000 8,100,000
Echoing Hills 86 Surface Water 10,300 23,000
Millers HOA3 100 Ground Water 5,000 60,000
Warsaw 713 Ground Water 80,000 218,000
West Lafayette 2,613 Ground Water 225,000 1,080,000
Other 4 570 Ground Water 39,600 N/A
1 Estimates from Ohio EPA.
2 GPD = gallons per day.
3 Millers Home Owners Association.
4 Includes mobile home parks, nursing homes, housing developments, and religious institutions; total treatment plant capacity figure not available.
(Informational source: Coshocton County Ground-Water Resources. P. D. Golden, K. T. Ricker, L. C. Brown. AEX-480.16. Ohio State University Extension)
Five Watersheds impacting Coshocton County
o 05040001 Tuscarawas
o 05040002 Mohican
o 05040003 Walhonding
o 05040004 Muskingum
o 05040005 Wills Creek
GOAL 1: To efficiently utilize the water resources of and for Coshocton County while maintaining good quality water for public water supplies, propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for domestic, agricultural, industrial, commercial, municipal, recreation and other beneficial uses.
Strategies
1. The county should consider the physical capacity of the land and water to accommodate land uses when planning for the location, type and density of rural development.
2. Maintain rural densities of 1 to 3 acres per dwelling in rural residential areas to minimize potential groundwater pollution from septic tank use. Even lower densities should be required when soil limitations show more than the usual limitations for septic tank systems or approved alternative on site sewage systems.
3. In areas experiencing proven water pollution from septic tanks or inadequate water supply, encourage the provision of alternative individual treatment system or water systems to overcome health hazards or to provide a greater margin of public safety in allowable developments.
4. Minimize soil erosion and sedimentation by encouraging soil conservation techniques. Educational programs and technical assistance should be provided in voluntary erosion abatement.
5. The County Health Department should sustain sanitary surveys in areas of concentrated rural development to determine present or potential septic tank pollution problems.
6. Residential, commercial and industrial development should be encouraged to be designed or located in a manner to maintain an acceptable impact on water quality.
7. Coshocton County should continue to support watershed management practices that protect and enhance water quality and quantity.
8. Water resources used as municipal water supplies should be protected by encouraging the strict enforcement by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency and Ohio Department of Health Standards.
9. Small watersheds that are current or potential water sources for municipalities shall be identified, and coordination requirements defined, in intergovernmental agreements if the city or villages determines that special protective measures are needed for the watershed. When municipalities have identified particular needs and methods for protecting their watersheds, the county shall consider including such measures within the Coshocton County Comprehensive Plan.
10. Encourage water quality testing of rural residential wells through a public information program.
11. Improve maintenance and use of residential and industrial
septic systems by:
a. encouraging proper operation and maintenance of septic systems.
b. encouraging water conservation to reduce waste loading,
c. educating users about detrimental chemical additives, particularly those containing chlorinated organic solvents, that are sold to improve septic system and drain field operation.
12. Coshocton County should recognize the risk to maintenance of good quality groundwater from improperly abandoned wells and encourages proper abandonment of unused wells.
13. Participate in cooperative water quality planning through such agencies as the Ohio EPA and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Army Corps of Engineers, Ohio State University Extension, and U.S. Geologic Survey.
14. Encourage water providers to share delivery systems and supply sources within populated growth boundaries.
15. Encourage construction of wells for municipal water use only within populated growth boundaries to minimize impacts of wellhead protection areas on other land uses.
GOAL 2: To ensure all standards and regulations applicable to waters in Coshocton County are coordinated.
Strategies
1. Coshocton County should coordinate with state and federal agencies to help ensure the waters of the county comply with applicable state and federal water quality standards.
2. Coshocton County should, to the extent financially and practically possible, support water quality or quality management plans and programs of federal, state and regional agencies.
3. In supporting good decisions about land use, the County should encourage conservation of water resources, improved treatment of point sources of pollution and the control of non-point sources of pollution.
4. Encourage Ohio EPA to expand their monitoring program and increase sample areas to determine locations approaching or exceeding drinking water standards. Impacts from domestic sewage shortfalls should be assessed to identify any possible hazards.
5. Coshocton County should cooperate with municipal and other public water service providers in development and implementation of wellhead protection programs consistent with Ohio EPA state water quality and land-use requirements.
6. The Strategies of this Comprehensive Plan should provide a framework to protect the groundwater resources of these and other aquifers from unsustainable levels of use.
GOAL 3: To strive for an adequate quantity of water for beneficial uses within the County.
Strategies
1. Evaluation of demand for water should include, but not be limited to, the following potential beneficial uses in no particular order: domestic, municipal, agriculture, stream flow augmentation, industrial, commercial, livestock, mining, and recreation.
2. Identify and designate areas of the county that lack sufficient water as “Groundwater Limited Areas”.
GOAL 4: To educate property owners about the importance of the use of their property to water quality and quantity.
Strategies
1. The Coshocton County Regional Planning Commission may develop and maintain a source of information regarding water conservation, water quality protection, and water laws for public use.
2. Coshocton County Regional Planning Commission should refer land use applicants to sources of information regarding water conservation, water quality protection, and water rights early in the development review process.
3. Encourage individual water conservation practices to hold water
demands to a minimum through a public information program.
4. Help ensure that adequate information is submitted by developers seeking new groundwater rights to determine whether the proposed consumption will exceed the sustainable yield of the aquifer or interfere with other wells in the area.
Mineral Resources
Mineral production in Coshocton County has played key roles in the current infrastructure development and maintenance and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan recognizes the importance of mineral and aggregate resources. Because of their limited availability, mineral and aggregate resources require an through understanding of necessary considerations because of their importance to a healthy and growing economy. Therefore, the land use planning process needs to further investigate the relationships among the geologic, economic, and environment-related characteristics of mineral commodities and deposit types. In addition, land use management considerations will require increasing needs for better geologic and minerals data on industrial minerals, especially in areas adjacent to growing population centers and prime agriculture farm land. A through investigation and discussion of the mineral and rock resources in Coshocton County should be considered in the future to determine what resources remain as viable contributors to the local economy.
Information from the Ohio Department of Natural Resources Geosurvey and interactive map for Coshocton
County lists the following minerals removed from mines and quarries annually:
Coal 33,959 ton.
The Ohio Coal Association listed 2001 production at 54,530 short ton.
Sand, gravel, and sandstone 32,137 ton
Sand and gravel 402,408 ton
Sandstone and Conglomerate 30,723 ton
In 2002 the Ohio Division of Mineral Resources Management reported that the volatility of the oil and gas cycles in part, contributed to the lowest number of wells being drilled since at least 1988. There has been a decline in oil and gas production for the past 10 years. As the 7th ranked county in wells drilled, Coshocton County has followed the trend.
The long-term effort of data collection and interpretation provides natural-resources managers and policymakers with essential earth-science information needed to make future land use decisions about Coshocton County resources and mitigation of environmental problems.
GOAL 5: To plan for and protect mineral and aggregate resources for future use.
Strategies
Coshocton County Should:
1. Consideration applications for new or expanded resource sites in accordance with state regulatory policies and guidelines in a proactive manner.
2. Conduct periodic resource use and inventory reviews.
Forests/Woodlands
Coshocton County has 177,057 acres of woodland. According to the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, in 1991 there was 2.05 times more growth than removals of growing stock and 1.90 times more saw timber growth than removals. Forest/woodlands are significant to the economic, recreational and environmental character of Coshocton County. These forest and woodlands provide the direct resource base for the forest industry and an indirect base for related industries. A majority of the water resources of the County originate in the forested areas of the County and are primary watershed areas. These forests also serve a multitude of functions that include abundant wildlife habitat and areas that are widely used for outdoor recreation. The unique scenic and environmental qualities of forest lands make them attractive for recreational activities such as camping, hiking, fishing, hunting, water sports, etc. These activities, in addition to providing an important social benefit, can also contribute significantly to the economy of Coshocton County.
Woodland also provides an abundance of fish and wildlife habitat. A large number of animals require the cover, food supply, and protection provided by the timber and other vegetation for their continued existence.
Agriculture and timber production are similar and compatible land uses. The long-term growth aspect of timber production makes it different from other agricultural production. However, both programs need similar protection from non-compatible activities to insure that forestry continues to be a viable industry if managed properly by private landowners and public entities.
GOAL 6: Protect and maintain our forest resource.
Strategies
1. Support a woodland protection program in Coshocton County to limit the uses of identified woodlands to timber production, farming, watershed, wildlife habitat, recreation and other compatible uses. Designate appropriate areas for continued forest activities.
2. Develop a timber conservation zone and apply it to those areas best suited to woodland uses.
3. On lands that contain a mixture of agricultural and forest uses a Farm/Timber zone should applied to protect these resources uses from incompatible uses.
4. Forest management and harvesting activities in Coshocton County should be conducted according to the Best Management Practices (BMP’s) for erosion control for logging practices in Ohio, administered by the ODNR, State Forestry Department.
5. Strive to conserve woodlands and mixed farm/timber lands by maintaining a mixed forest and agricultural base and to protect the county’s forest and farm economies by making possible economically efficient woodlot and agricultural practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting of woodland tree species and agricultural products as the leading use on forest land and mixed farm/timber land consistent with sound management of soil, air, water and fish and wildlife resources and to provide for recreational opportunities.
6. Prohibit subdivision development and other land divisions creating new dwelling sites that are not compatible with the protection and efficient management of forestry and woodlands.
Soil
The Soil Survey of Coshocton County contains information that affects land use planning. It contains predictions of soil behavior for selected land uses. It highlights soil limitations, improvements needed to overcome the limitations, and the impact of selected land uses, on the environment. The Soil and Water Conservation District, the County Health Department, and some developers are using this recent publication as a guide for development. Recommend the County be proactive and encourage the continued use of the Soil Survey for Coshocton County and that sufficient resources be allocated to enhance the GIS format so that it becomes a web based format for easier and more frequent use by the public.
FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
The Woodbury Wildlife Area contains 20,000 acres, Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District at Mohawk Dam and Wills Creek have 3,730 acres, and Coshocton Park District contains 450 acres. This large wildlife habitat area has resulted in a large population of deer, raccoon, turkey, geese, and other species. The streams, rivers, lakes, and ponds are home to aquatic wildlife. The discussion of fish and wildlife habitat issues emphasizes that fish and wildlife are directly dependent on the quality of the natural environment. With awareness of the environmental needs of fish and wildlife, care can be exercised in reviewing lot splits and developments in rural areas of Coshocton County which will remain in agriculture and forestry uses, thereby achieving most of the protection needs of this habitat.
The Coshocton County goals and Strategies in regard to protecting fish and wildlife habitat are:
GOAL 7: Protect fish and wildlife habitat, maintain optimal ecological balance and protect endangered species.
Strategies
1. New roads requiring County approval shall be located to avoid identified habitat areas whenever possible. Bridges, roads and access rights-of-way should be designed to avoid restriction of channel capacity and minimize removal of shoreline vegetation.
2. Developments should retain vegetation along streams, lakes, reservoirs, and fencerows to provide for shelter, shade, food and nesting.
3. To maintain stream quality and protect sensitive waterfowl areas, land uses that require drainage, excessive removal of riparian vegetation, alteration of stream banks and filling shall be discouraged in these locations.
4. Conflicts with wildlife shall be considered in land development. Development adjacent to streams, sensitive waterfowl areas and critical wildlife areas shall incorporate adequate setbacks and buffer zones.
5. Development density shall be controlled so that significant wildlife habitat will not be adversely affected.
6. Coshocton County will cooperate with local, state and federal agencies to identify, conserve and protect fish and wildlife habitat and in implementation measures for the protection of such areas.
7. Native plant species, wetlands and stream bank vegetation on managed public lands should be protected.
NOISE IMPACTS
Exposure to excessive noise levels over prolonged periods can be a threat to health. Noise pollution is not a pervasive problem in rural Coshocton County but excessive noise from certain industries, from highly traveled roads or the airport could reduce the livability of nearby dwellings. Attempts to achieve control over excessive noise by controlling the sources should be considered in the future. Despite controls residences close to a heavily traveled road could be adversely affected. For example, 50 feet from a dwelling the sound level of a single new accelerating automobile is about 80 decibels.
How often loud noises occur is a factor in how it affects people. During the daytime it is common to experience numerous loud noises for short periods. These same noises, if they occur at night, would not only waken someone but, if frequently enough, would prevent them from getting back to sleep. Noises above 55 decibels will disturb normal conversation and are considered potentially harmful. Between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. sounds above 45 decibels inside a dwelling disturb sleep.
Outside noise measured inside a building is 10 decibels lower with the windows open and 20 decibels lower with the windows closed. New dwellings located in close proximity to the noise source can be adversely affected. It may be necessary for the County to consider noise impacts when approving development near certain sources of noise.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Solid Waste management involves collection and disposal of various solid waste materials such as household, commercial, and industrial garbage. There is currently one public Ohio Environmental Protection Agency licensed landfill in Coshocton County where private and commercial haulers deposit solid waste. Because of the landfill method of disposing of solid waste, potential concerns for land and water quality exists.
The goal of the solid waste program is to meet the needs for safe, efficient, and sanitary storage, collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste, and to increase, to the maximum, salvage reclamation and reuse of materials from solid waste. The various disposal alternatives will need to be evaluated and a new disposal facility developed by the time the current landfill reaches capacity in the future.
Siting solid waste disposal facilities is a significant land use issue. Land use compatibility and environmental, and economic impacts as well as public acceptance must be considered. Specific OEPA site criteria for any new facility should be clearly understood and become of the County’s Land Use Plan.
SEWAGE SLUDGE DISPOSAL
The by-product of treating wastewater or sewage is accumulation of organic solids. When sewage is processed in a treatment facility, the process involves removal of waste solids from the sewage water. The purified water is returned to rivers and the solids or sludge remains. The disposal of sludge is usually accomplished by either taking it to a landfill or by spreading it on agricultural lands as an organic fertilizer and soil conditioner. The use of sludge can be beneficial to agricultural land, making it more productive. It contains significant quantities of nitrogen and phosphorus plus the humus material that can improve the quality of farmland.
The use of sludge as an agricultural fertilizer has its limitations since its over-application can be a threat to land and water quality. Improper use can result in harmful accumulations of nitrogen and heavy metals. Because of these problems, each application site of sludge is reviewed and approved by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA). The main concerns involve disposal of the sewage sludge in an environmentally safe way.
There presently are three generators of sludge in Coshocton County that produce sludge that must be disposed of. Currently, only the City of Coshocton produces sufficient quantities of sludge to present a disposal problem. However, the needs of Warsaw and West Lafayette must also be understood. In addition, municipalities from neighboring counties may utilize land in Coshocton County as OEPA approved application sites.
Coshocton County recognizes the potential beneficial aspect of agricultural application of limited amounts of sewage sludge. However, disposal of unlimited quantities of sewage sludge becomes a disposal problem of a different level. The dumping of large quantities of sludge in one location would create potential land use, health, productivity and water quality problems.
The County Strategies relating to sewage sludge application to land should encompass the following:
1. Encourage the beneficial agricultural application of sewage sludge in limited amounts according to OEPA standards.
2. Require monitoring of sludge disposal sites for possible problems.
AIR QUALITY PLANNING
Air quality is monitored through the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) and standards are enforced on a regional basis. The Logan OEPA Regional office has jurisdiction over Coshocton County. It should be the policy of Coshocton County to understand the applicable state and federal air quality standards.
Probably the most pronounced problem with air quality in Coshocton County occurs during periods of atmospheric stagnation, warm can trap pollution at low elevations. These weather conditions therefore magnify air pollution conditions. Odors tend to concentrate in areas of higher population density causing discomfort and complaints. This pollution would normally disperse at higher elevations or be vented out of the area by the wind. Because of the air pollution potential, Coshocton County land use development strategies must consider potential affects upon air quality and should be developed to minimize pollution problems. However, the potential for conflict between the interests of maintaining air quality standards and the important economic development and agricultural practices must be recognized.
Summary
While the present and future availability and safety of water is good for Coshocton County, we must protect our rivers and future reservoir sites for water supplies. We must prevent septic tank effluent, agriculture, industry, and mining from polluting our streams and soils. This was the goal in 1970 and is still necessary in 2004. In order to insure a continued supply of water to this variety of uses, Coshocton County will continue to need reliable and current information regarding groundwater resources. Sources of this information are not always abundant, but the county needs to obtain or generate sufficient data on which to base land use decisions that affect, or are affected by, groundwater supply in order to avert overdraft and land use conflicts.
The water resources portion of this plan provides a discussion of the possible issues facing Coshocton County with regards to water supply, use, and quality. However, a further in depth review and analysis will provide clearer goals and for county decision-makers to employ when faced with matters relating to these issues. A separate Water Management Plan should be developed and adopted as part of the county comprehensive land use plan for reference. The goals then should be part of the overall guidance for county land use decisions developed from the information presented in the Water Management Plan and should be utilized in all future land use decisions. The demand for consumptive use of water has and will continue to increase. At the same time, increasing use of the resource by recreation and the need to maintain or enhance fish habitat argues for consumption issues. The increased human activity in the county heightens the risk that the resource will be polluted.
Jobs have been lost with less coal mining and drilling for gas and oil. Mining and drilling are better regulated resulting in less pollution. Orphan (abandoned) wells remain that need to be plugged.
• Former surface mined land has been reclaimed as a wildlife area.
• Deer, raccoon, turkey, and other wild animals have become numerous enough to become nuisances. They eat farmers’ crops, kill sheep, and cause accidents on the highways. The county must work with the Division of Wildlife to encourage hunters to take more doe. ODNR should not introduce wildlife into the area that create a hazard to livestock.
• Coshocton County currently has an adequate and safe water supply.
• There are 11 Coshocton County sites listed in the Master Sites List (MSL) where there is evidence of, or it is suspected that waste management has resulted in the contamination of air, water, or soil and there is a confirmed or potential threat to human health or the environment. Eight are situated in the city of Coshocton, 2 in West Lafayette, and 1 in Monroe Township. Planning groups need to secure funding to clean up these sites.
• The selling of rural land parcels in small tracts not large enough for sustainable agriculture production is a threat to the agriculture economics of the county.
• Unincorporated areas have been experiencing more new single-family home construction than the urban areas of Coshocton County. This trend not only impacts the rural character of the county, but also impacts the cost to provide government services to county residents. Inspection and continued regulation of water supplies and septic systems are needed to protect the environment.
• Ecologically and scientifically significant Natural Areas contain components that are unique to that area and location and cannot be relocated. The objective of the County should be to preserve and protect sections of these ecologically diverse components before they are forever lost or altered. When land use changes are proposed in the vicinity of identified natural areas, possible conflicts shall be identified and evaluated as to their social, economic, environmental and energy consequences. Significant conflicts shall be resolved. As new natural areas are proposed they will be reviewed and if determined to be ecologically and scientifically significant should be protected.
Back to Top
Law Enforcement & Safety Services Sub-Committee (Updated January 2005)
Committee Chair: Ray Worthington
Commitee Members: Mike Perkins, William Arnold, Tim Rogers, Ron Lusk, Darren Walker, Gilbert Parkhill, Brian Stitler, Ty Stewart, Chet Beard, Scott Mast, Trent Parkhill, Travis Goodwill, Stan Braxton, Andy Dobson, Ernie Snyder, Ken Pepper, Mike Layton, Don Lusk, Don Carpenter, and Donna Carpenter
The agencies and departments that serve Coshocton County have an interesting and diverse history as they have developed over the past one hundred ninety two years. The following introduction will briefly trace the beginning and growth as they evolved to today’s services.
Refer to attached map for location of the service and the area covered. An “in depth” study of Coshocton County Law Enforcement & Safety Services is available in Law Enforcement & Safety Services – Sub Committee of the “2003 Coshocton County Strategic Land Use Planning Committee”
Law Enforcement
Office of County Sheriff began in 1811, with 38 Sheriffs to date. Three jails have existed prior to current Justice Center. Current jail is rated for housing 27 inmates but averages 67 daily and has exceeded 78 inmates. A staff of 67 employees with 38 additional Special & Auxiliary Deputies (16 mounted officers) complete the staffing level of the Sheriff’s office. The communications center dispatches all law enforcement, fire & emergency medical services within the county along with neighboring county emergency services. The City of Coshocton contracts with the Sheriff’s Department for Law Enforcement and is charged with all Law Enforcement in the county & city, except for the village of West Lafayette. West Lafayette has a staff of 16 providing police protection for that village.
History of Coshocton County EMS
Early ambulance service was provided by local funeral homes. This was mainly due to the fact that they were the only ones that had the communication equipment and staff to provide it.
Mid 1970’s
Idea was discussed to form a “volunteer service”. This was mainly due to impending state and federal legislation and new requirements for ambulance services. Warsaw is credited with forming the 1st ambulance service based outside the funeral home. The Warsaw squad officially began service on February 3, 1973. The squad was staffed by an all volunteer force.
Mid 1970’s
The village of West Lafayette, Keene and the City of Coshocton follow Warsaw’s initiative and form ambulance services in their respective areas.
February 1976
Coshocton County Commissioners assume control of all ambulances services. This was mainly due to additional state and federal legislation. In addition, the Commissioners had a better ability to secure state and federal funding. The squads remained staffed by an all volunteer force.
June 1, 1986
The Keene station closes due to funding and a lack of 911 calls in that area.
1989
Advanced Life Support is implemented in to the system. This provides an increased level of care to the community through enhanced equipment and training.
1995
First part-paid personnel are hired to supplement the volunteer force. Changes in society, along with in increase in call volume, limit the amount of time volunteers can contribute to the system. Part-time, and eventually full-time personnel, are added throughout the next few years.
July 1999
County Commissioners ask Medflight to assume responsibility of the County EMS service. County Commissioners were responsible for EMS for 23 years before turning operations over to Medflight. The Commissioners asked for assistance due to numerous changes in state and federal legislation, changes in the EMS industry as a whole, and dramatic changes in insurance reimbursement stemming from The 1997 Balanced Budget Act.
November 2003
Medflight continues to operate the EMS service. Today, CCEMS is staffed with a combination of part-time and full-time partners at each base. CCEMS continues to operate out of three bases, which are located Coshocton, West Lafayette and Warsaw. A 3.0 mill operating levy passed in November of 2003 enables enhancements in staffing and equipment for the service, which provides the community with a better care.
All reports are driven by the history & origins of each organization
Coshocton County Haz-Mat Team
First Haz-Mat Team formed & organized 1991/1992 – Mac Richcreek First team leader
First vehicle a used EMS squad was complimented with a donated trailer by Wiley Organics in 1994
Scott Matchett & Ken Posey team leaders in 1996/1997
Larry Wilkin team leader 1997/2002
Team reorganized in 2002 & additional training provided 21 members trained to Technician Level
18 Career firemen & 3 Volunteer Firemen under team leadership of Rick Mills
Bakersville Volunteer Fire Department - Company #1
Several tragedies in Adams Township determines a need for fire protection at Bakersville
Two stores in Bakersville were destroyed by fire in 1923.
Bakersville School was struck by lightning & burned in 1938. The West Lafayette Fire chief died of heart attack during that incident.
Bakersville feed mill burned in 1943.
A home in Bakersville burned for a total loss in 1959 despite efforts of Baltic & West Lafayette Firefighters.
The Independent Bakersville Volunteer Fire Department was formed with the fire station sitting on the site of the house lost in 1959.
First fire truck was a converted gas truck & a portable pump.
First new truck in 1970, First new Van/Rescue in 1974, First new engine in 1984
Fire protection in this rural setting is complicated with 3 phone exchanges, 3 school districts, 2 area codes, 4 zip codes & mutual aid with Fire Departments in 2 counties.
Strong support from community maintains the department of 20/22 volunteers that have trained members as first responders. Financial support includes fundraisers, township contract & levy.
One chief with 40 years still serves.
F.C.V. Volunteer Fire Department-Conesville – Company #2
Conesville Village Council determines a need for fire protection in the 1950’s
Franklin & Virginia Township join the effort to support a department and the F.C.V. (Franklin-Conesville-Virginia) Volunteer Fire Department is formed in 1955.
Harold & Hilda Thomas donate location to build present station.
First apparatus purchased in 1956 for $12,500
Original membership of 20-25 volunteers charge members .25 cents per month for fuel & supplies to operate equipment.
Ladies Auxiliary was formed in 1956 and continues as a supporting force.
Several station additions are included in the seven bays, station support area & two outlying buildings. Equipment includes 2 engines, 1 tanker, 1 rescue vehicle, 2 brush trucks & 2 boats w/motors.
23 Volunteers are paid $2.50 p/hour for training & drills. They are covered with Workman’s Compensation & secondary insurance for line of duty incidents. Calls are unpaid volunteer service.
Three Chiefs have served to date.
City of Coshocton, Fire Department-Full time, Paid, Professional – Company #3
Formed in January 1906 with two stations. One on Main Street & one on Walnut Street to provide protection on either side of the Pennsylvania Railroad tracks while the crossings were blocked by train traffic. Early equipment was horse & hand drawn.
The first motor driven apparatus was purchased July 25, 1916 for $5450.00.
Captain Wilmer Hale was killed in the line of duty December 16, 1975
City of Coshocton renamed Walnut Street Station “Hale Station” in honor of Captain Hale
The Main Street Station closed in 1982 and Department consolidated into the Walnut Station.
City builds a new station on 7th Street in 1989 with the name “Hale Station” coming with the department.
Today’s Hale Station houses 4 engines, a 100” aerial, a utility pick-up, 2 administration cars, a Haz-Mat trailer, and a boat w/motor, as well as living quarters for the 18 member department.
Seven Fire Chiefs have served to date.
Three Rivers Volunteer Fire District – Company #4
Formally - Tuscarawas Township Volunteer Fire Department
North Side in Canal Lewisville & South Side in Pleasant Valley – Company #4 & #5
Fire claims lives of 2 children in a home fire in early 1950’s
First fire levy failed to pass in 1950/51
Fire levy passed in November 1952
Fire department founded on January 7, 1953
Two companies were eventually formed- North Sid – Company #4 & South Side-Company #5
First vehicle was a donated used gas truck-Cleaned & converted
Fundraises & donations provided much initial equipment
Both stations benefit from Ladies Auxiliary & wives of firefighters
First two new vehicles ordered - One for North Side & one for South Side 1953/54
North Side station began as a 2 story school house-Building converted in mid 1950’s
South Side Station built with levy funds of 1954/55 and volunteer labor.
Manned by 40 unpaid firefighters or 20 at each station house.
Three Rivers Fire District formed October 1, 2003 including Tuscarawas, Keene & Millcreek Townships
West Lafayette Volunteer Fire Department – Company #6
Village council purchases first fire equipment in 1898. The hand pumper, hose reel & ladder wagon was operated by the council, marshal & mayor. The pumper still in possession of the department was refinished in 1970 and still “works”.
The first fire department was organized after village mayor appoints first chief in 1930.
Moore Enameling donates modern electric fire siren 1931- It is still in use
The first new fire engine purchased in 1931
A Deluge pumper was donated to department by Moore Enameling in 1945.
A fireman’s association is formed in 1954
A boat w/motor & trailer was added in 1960 and a van used as rescue truck in 1961.
Fire department headquartered in building on South Kirk Street until municipal building & fire station were completed on Railroad Street.
The present firehouse was built (4 bays) through efforts of council, firemen, & civic groups 1962
A ladies auxiliary “The Sparkettes” was formed to support fundraising
20/25 Volunteers receive “clothing gratuity” for each run. (Currently they are forgoing payment to pay for a truck)
Six Chief Officers have served to date
Walhonding Valley Volunteer Fire District-Warsaw – Company #7
Formally Warsaw Volunteer Fire Department
Warsaw forms first volunteer fire department in 1925. A two wheeled chemical (soda acid) fire extinguisher cart purchased in September 1925 was drawn to the fire by local business’s or individual’s truck. Refills came via a bucket brigade.
Fire station constructed with a siren on the roof in May 1943.
Formal organization of Warsaw Volunteer Firemen takes place in 1947.
The first factory built fire truck (1931 model) was purchased from West Lafayette in 1955.
The department was certified & reorganized in 1957
The first new fire truck was purchased & delivered in May 1958 via bond issues.
Warsaw Volunteer Emergency Squad began with many firefighters assuming additional responsibility to form & staff this service.
Contracts signed to provide fire protection to townships of Bedford, Bethlehem, Jefferson, Monroe, New Castle, Perry, Tiverton & the Village of Nellie.
Walhonding Valley Fire District formed in 1987 covering 228 square miles.
New station constructed in 1996 houses 2 engines, 2 tankers, 2 grass trucks, 1 mini pumper, 1 rescue, 1 dive trailer, 1 ATV, 1 boat w/motor.
35 volunteers are paid for training & runs. Department provides 2 paid firefighters, 12 hours per day 6 days a week.
Seven Chief Officers have served to date.
Outside agencies providing services to Coshocton County
Baltic, Dresden & Frazeysburg Volunteer Fire Departments serve Crawford, Perry & Washington Townships
Swiss Valley and Newcomerstown E.M.S. serve Crawford & Adams Townships.
Major needs for Coshocton County Safety Services: Goals (no specific order)
1) County wide water system
2) New jail
3) New fire stations &/or upgrade old buildings
4) County wide radio communications system
5) Adequate training
6) Manpower
County wide water system
Because of population density, terrain, State Wildlife property and large tracts of previously strip mined areas; it is not a realistic goal that the county be covered 100% with a water system.
Refer Water & Sewer report: We agree that population centers, industrial & commercial areas shall be well served with systems that incorporate existing capabilities of Coshocton, West Lafayette & Warsaw. These systems should extend their coverage or join a water district to fill in the gaps between the three systems & extend near population centers not presently served.
New water systems, storage tanks should take into consideration the need of adequate capacity to handle fire flows for hydrants, sprinkler system needs and growth in area served.
A strong argument in the water system funding issue is money saved on insurance coverage.
New County Jail
The question is not, if we have a new jail but when & where. The need is here and now.
When funding becomes available the location shall be where the site can be protected from fire, weather, and civil unrest without presenting a threat to the general population. Safe access for the EMS serving the inmates shall be a consideration. The building shall be served by a water system that will support sprinkler protection. The facility shall have a communications system that will interface with all county, state & federal emergency systems. Locations that could be considered include old National Guard Armory, the old property known as the former County Home or remote locations in the Airport area. The size should be addressed by a special committee with the expertise in this field. All issues will require funding that is beyond the scope of this committee.
New fire stations &/or upgrade old buildings
As of this report several building are original firehouses and are approaching 50 years old.
Some buildings are old structures that were not intended to house fire equipment and will require replacement in the future. Location of stations operated by volunteer responders is a major consideration. Presently the SR 16/US 36 corridor has 7 state highway accesses & 47 township & county road accesses. Future highway construction & moves to limit access to the corridor may have a negative impact on responders getting to the station & emergency equipment getting to the incident location.
New structures should allow for expansion, have drive through bays & accommodate larger equipment as it evolves. Volunteer stations should be served by sprinkler protection & alarm systems if the building is not constantly occupied. Opportunities to share space with parks, recreation areas, or highly protected risk properties should be considered.
Refer Tourism: Activities such as moto-cross (extreme-sports), water recreation activities and expansion of horseback riding trails will have an impact on equipment & training required to respond to emergencies.
Refer Transportation: Roadways, driveways, bridges, culverts either new or upgrading old shall be able to accommodate emergency equipment safely. Existing roadways shall be free of obstructions, such as limbs, structures, poles, wires & etc.
Since the completion of this report another Volunteer Fire Department has gone into service.
November 1, 2004 the Jackson Township Volunteer Fire Department began answering calls.
Staffed by 20 firemen, two Engines, one tanker, & one brush truck make up the new Fire Department in a new building on SR 541 W about ½ mile west of the Coshocton City Corporation line.
County wide radio communications system
The terrain in Coshocton County prevents 100% emergency radio coverage for the area. The location of radio towers is a prime concern for effective communications. The non-emergency communications towers & sites on private owned property could be utilized without redundant towers and should be considered. Benefits of emergency services ability to communicate among each other as well as with neighboring counties are important considerations.
Communications have, are & will be a major concern for Law Enforcement & Safety Services. Even initiatives underway will not permit cross-communications between the various agencies. It must continually be addressed.
Adequate training
All emergency services would benefit from qualified instruction being available within the county. In the case of the volunteer services the candidate is working a full time job or is a full time parent. Versatile training schedules are a key issue in attracting volunteers. Our county has the Joint Vocational School & the Coshocton Education Center as resources for this vital issue. High School class offerings could include: Introduction to EMS, Law Enforcement or Firefighting and be credited as part of basic training. Continuing education is offered in selected emergency fields.” In house” training is appealing to part time employees or volunteers.
Manpower
The apparent trend of Coshocton County becoming a bedroom community and/or a retirement community will increase demands on all emergency services. There will be a greater need for services provided by the emergency agencies. There is concern for the manpower available to operate the emergency services of the county.
Back to Top
Parks & Open Spaces Sub-Committee (Updated November 2004)
Committee Chair: Ann Miller
Committee members: Ann Miller, Chair, Neil Caldwell, Michelle Darner, Bill Edwards, Alice Hoover, Bob Johnson, Tom Meiser, Steve Miller, Ed Myers, Brad Perkins and Les Reid.
Introduction and Historical Background:
Parks and open spaces provide the opportunity for active recreational pursuits and also for more passive pursuits such as nature study. They provide a place for sport-oriented activities such as golf, swimming, tennis, soccer, etc. and also a place for non-sport activities such as picnicking, bird-watching, camping, etc. In addition to the personal benefit that residents receive from parks and open spaces, the County benefits in two other important ways. The first is an environmental benefit. Land used for parks and open spaces helps assure the land will be preserved for a long time which will then enhance air quality and protect wildlife and plants. The second benefit is economic in nature. The development of parks and open spaces is attractive to tourists, it may increase property values, and businesses may be more interested in a community with a viable park system.
The first land use Plan for Coshocton County was written in 1970. That plan recommended that community parks use the existing resources and be located at or near elementary schools. The plan projected a large population growth and suggested that emphasis should be placed on the development of community parks. It has been over thirty years since that first plan was drafted. The county has changed in many ways, some of which were foreseen in the 1970 plan and some that were not foreseen. One of the most significant things that was predicted, but did not happen, was population growth.
The fact that the population figure remained relatively stable impacts the recommendations of the first plan. According to the Ohio State University Data Center, population growth for Coshocton County through 2015 is predicted to remain flat at about 35, 400. This plan will be based on this prediction and will concentrate on sustaining and improving existing resources.
Historically, recreational areas were important to the people of Coshocton County. The largest park in the County, Lake Park was opened by private individuals, Dick and Helen Johns, in 1923. It was owned by a succession of private citizens until 1959 when the State Legislature passed a bill conveying the lake, Roscoe, and Mudport Basins to the city of Coshocton. Then in 1985 the Coshocton County Park District was formed as a governmental agency. Three Commissioners were appointed and Park Director was hired. The Park District is approximately 90% self-funded. In November of 2002 the Park District placed a 9/10 mil levy on the ballot. The levy did not pass. Funding and the maintenance of the facilities continue to be a challenge for the Park staff and the Park Commissioners.
Vision and Goals
The Parks and Recreation Task Force is dedicated to the vision that an adequate number of parks, recreation areas, and natural spaces will be preserved and maintained for future generations of Coshocton County.
To that end these goals have been established:
1. To identify all existing parks, recreation areas, and natural areas within Coshocton County.
2. To recommend the parks, recreation areas, and natural areas that should be maintained and preserved and/or expanded.
3. To suggest areas where new parks, recreation areas, and natural spaces could be established.
4. To advocate that between 6.25 and 10.5* acres of open space per 1000 persons are dedicated to parks, recreation areas. And natural areas.
(*The National Recreation and Park Association per William E. Daehler, Jr., Land Management Administrator Ohio Department of Natural Resources.)
Facilities Analysis
It is evident from the number of parks, ball fields, and other recreational facilities already in place that the people of Coshocton County consider parks and open spaces an important component in their everyday lives. It also holds true historically that recreational areas were important in the County. The largest park in the County, Lake Park was opened by private individuals, Dick and Helen Johns, in 1923. It was owned by a succession of private citizens until 1959 when the State Legislature passed a bill conveying the lake, Roscoe, and Mudport Basins to the city of Coshocton. Then in 1985 the Coshocton County Park District was formed as a governmental agency. Three Commissioners were appointed and Park Director was hired. The Park District is approximately 90% self-funded. In November of 2002 the Park District placed a 9/10 mil levy on the ballot. The levy did not pass. Funding and the maintenance of the facilities continue to be a challenge for the Park staff and the Park Commissioners.
Parks and recreational facilities have been mapped onto a county map and identified as: Points of Interest, Ball Fields, Birding, Camping, Golf, Hiking/Walking Trails, Horseback Riding, Hunting, Ice-Skating, Picnic/Parks, Shooting, Skateboarding, Soccer, Swimming, and Tennis. These points of interest are identified on Map #1. General areas of recreational opportunities are indicated on Map # 2.
The above mentioned activities and facilities are not only important to the residents of the county but they also can be a “draw” for tourists. They should be maintained and developed with the best interests of both groups in mind.
The Coshocton Park District includes Bancroft Park and Lake Park. Lake Park is the largest park in the District and in the County. Centrally located and adjacent to Roscoe Village, it is heavily used by both County residents and tourists. With the addition of the Aquatic Center in 1999, it is the magnet that draws people to the Park. The number of campers staying at the campground has increased significantly due to the new pool. The renovated Lake Park Pavilion can be rented by groups or individuals and is reserved almost every weekend throughout the year. It is one of the few surviving dance pavilions in the State and is of historic significance in addition to being a well-used facility. The Canal Boat is available for trips down the canal April through October. The Park works in conjunction with Roscoe Village booking charter trips and individual reservations. Hilltop Golf Course is managed by the Park District. It is the only government-owned course in the county. The Park also offers numerous picnic shelters, walking and biking paths, hiking trails, an extensive playground, fishing in the canal basins, and ball fields.
Burt Park is situated on six acres in the center of the village of West Lafayette. It was completely restored and rededicated in May of 1998. The park contains a bandstand, picnic shelter, gazebos, tables, and benches. It is frequently used by West Lafayette residents for family picnics and for community functions.
Riverview Park located in the village of Warsaw is a popular site for residents of the Village and surrounding townships. The Park contains three shelters (one with kitchen facilities), a playground, picnic tables, swimming pool, tennis courts, ball fields, walking path, and a basketball court. The Park is truly a community focal point.
There are other smaller parks located throughout the County. These have been identified as: Hall Park in the City of Coshocton, owned by the Coshocton Board of Education; Bancroft Park in the city of Coshocton owned by the Coshocton Park District; South Sixth Street Park and the Otsego complex, both owned by the City of Coshocton; Fresno Park, owned by the Fresno Methodist Church; Bakersville Park, owned by the Bakersville Community Park Board; McElwee Park in New Castle, owned by Community of New Castle; Tiverton Park owned by the Township trustees; and Plainfield Park, owned by the Village of Plainfield. Other picnic areas in the County include Mohawk Dam area, Wills Creek area, the Boy Scout Camp, Sportsman’s Club, Cyclops Lodge, and the Fairgrounds. Each elementary school in the county has a playground that often serves as a neighborhood park for children and their families.
There are numerous ball fields located throughout the County. These are located in the City at the Otsego Ave. complex, the Himebaugh Lot, the Athletic Field (behind Stewart Field), and Cassingham Hollow. The Lake Park fields are comprised of softball fields, a Pony League diamond, and the upper diamond which is a very well-maintained baseball field. There are also fields located in Canal Lewisville, at Union School, River View Park, River View High School, Ridgewood Recreation fields in West Lafayette, Conesville, Fresno, New Castle, Nellie, Roscoe, Keene, and Plainfield.
Biking takes place anywhere there are roads and/or sidewalks to accommodate bike traffic. Specifically bike paths have been constructed at Lake Park, the Otsego complex (which includes a BMX course), paved paths at Riverview and Fresno parks, and the path that connects the city with Lake Park. The hiking trails at Lake Park, and Woodbury Wildlife Area can accommodate mountain biking.
There are four wonderful natural areas for birdwatchers: Woodbury Wildlife Area, Lake Park, Wills Creek, and the nature area on Morgan Run Road.
The county provides a number of opportunities for boating. There is a privately owned canoe livery on the Walhonding River near Lake Park. There is a boat ramp on the Muskingum River within Coshocton city limits. In addition to the Walhonding and the Muskingum Rivers, boaters can access the Kokosing River, the Tuscarawas River, Killbuck Creek, the Mohican River, Wills Creek, and the Lake Park Basins all within Coshocton County.
Camping is a popular activity in the County. The following locations and facilities offer campsites: Lake Park, Lake Lila, Shady Grove, Walhonding Hills, Roscoe Colonial Campground, Forest Hills, Muskingum Valley Scout Reservation, the Sportsman’s Club, Mohawk Dam, Whispering Falls, Tonawanda, Riverfront Campground, and the Fairgrounds (trailer camping only).
Fishing can be enjoyed in all the rivers, streams, ponds, and lakes in the County with permission of private landowners, if needed, and an up-to-date fishing license, if required.
There are five golf courses in the County: Hilltop Golf Course, Hickory Flats, River Greens, Coshocton Country Club, and Millcreek Meadows.
The sport of hiking and walking can obviously take place anywhere but there are a number of designated trails and paths within the County: The Towpath, Scarr Loop Trail, Scarr Forest Trail, and Eagle Ridge Trail, all at Lake Park; Woodbury Wildlife Area, Morgan Run Road nature area, Otsego Complex walking path, Riverview Park walking path, AEP coal lands trails, the Boy Scout Camp, Sportsman’s Club, Fresno Village path, Kids America Indoor track, the Fairgrounds, outdoor tracks at each of the county high schools.
Horseback riding can be enjoyed on the AEP coal land equestrian trail, on the Fairgrounds track, and at privately owned stables within the County.
Coshocton County has long been a destination for hunters. The land is specifically hunted for deer and wild turkey. There are over 20,000 acres of public land available and private lands are also used for this sport as long as permission has been given and a hunting license has been purchased.
There are soccer fields in numerous places throughout the County. Many are located near schools. The two largest soccer complexes are located at Lake Park and at the Otsego Ave. Complex. There are two indoor soccer fields at Kids America.
Two areas specifically designed for skateboarding are at the Otsego Ave. Complex and at Lake Park.
Shooting sports can be enjoyed at the Woodbury Wildlife, Area, the Sportsman’s Club, The Coshocton Gun Club, the Fresno Gun Club, and a one-thousand yard range near Plainfield.
There is one indoor swimming pool at Coshocton high School. Outdoor swimming pools and lakes include Lake Park Aquatic Center, Warsaw Community Pool, the West Lafayette Pool, Forest Hill Lake, Coshocton Town and Country Club Pool, and a pool at the Boy Scout Camp.
There are tennis courts at Coshocton High School, The Coshocton Town and Country Club, Hall Park, Riverview Community Park, Riverview High School; and indoor courts at Kids America and Schelgel’s farm.
Additional commercial recreational facilities and opportunities exist such as the Coshocton Bowling Center, Colonial Sports and Courts Health Fitness Center, and Kids America (an indoor recreation complex).
Action Plan
The National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) has established guidelines to be used in the planning, acquisition, and development of park, recreation, and open space lands, primarily at the community level. They were prepared as minimum rather than maximum guidelines. One standard that has evolved over time from studies of park acreage within metropolitan areas is between 6.25 and ten acres of park and recreation land per one thousand population. By adding the acreage of The Coshocton Park District (approximately 450 acres), Woodbury Wildlife Area (20,000 acres), and the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District in the Wills Creek area (3730 acres) we have already far exceeded the suggested 6.25-10 acres of recreational area per one thousand residents. At issue in Coshocton County is not the attainment of hundreds of additional acres but rather the stewardship of the land that has already been set aside for parks and recreation.
The Woodbury Wildlife Area is owned and under the control of the State of Ohio. The Wills Creek area is under the control of the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District. The County has little jurisdiction over those lands, however, local governments are urged to keep abreast of the care of and plans for these lands. County government and various forms of local government such as township trustees, the Coshocton Park District, village councils, etc. do have jurisdiction over the majority of the local parks, swimming pools, and ball fields. All forms of local government are urged to work together for the betterment of these areas. In the case of the Coshocton County Park District, the County and City governments are encouraged to cooperate to ensure stable funding for the District. This local park district is important to the residents of the County and is very important in attracting both permanent residents and tourists. In the same way it is crucial that Burt Park and Riverview Park receive local funding to remain viable recreation areas within their respective communities.
This portion of the Plan does not recommend that large portions of additional land be set aside for parks and recreation. It does strongly recommend that consideration be given to acquire or promote the following recreational opportunities (Map #3): 1. The Coshocton Park District work with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources to acquire the area known as Wild Turkey Locks. 2. County and local governments work to ensure that the Ohio to Erie Bike Trail, Panhandle Route, is completed through Coshocton County. 3. If substantial residential growth should occur in any township in the County that does not have a park and/or playground, that either the township Trustees or zoning laws would ensure that parks, playgrounds, and green spaces were constructed. 4. The wetlands area located adjacent to Ridgewood High School should be preserved. Interested parties are encouraged to seek state funding to insure that this ecologically fragile area be saved for future generations.
Back to Top
Residential/ Housing Sub-Committee
Committee Chairs: Tom Barcroft and Larry Endsley
1. Introduction
Any comprehensive Land Use Plan must provide for housing needs of the area residents. The housing must be adequate and affordable and meet the varied needs of present and future Coshocton County residents. Although no significant increase in county population is projected through 2015, the housing needs will change. This is due to older homes becoming obsolete, changes in the demographics of county residents and consumer desires. Residential housing needs must be coordinated with other county needs for land, i.e., industrial and commercial, farming and recreation. Also, the plan must be environmentally friendly. As water and sewer lines radiate from the City of Coshocton, growth of both residential and commercial properties will tend to follow the lines. This trend must be coordinated with the overall residential housing plan.
2. Background
a. Population of Coshocton County has not grown in proportion to overall Ohio growth. Probably the cause of this is very little industrial growth in Coshocton County. From 1900 to 2000, county population increased from 29,337 to 36,655. This represents a percentage increase of 25%. For the same time frame, the total Ohio population increased from 4,157,545 to 11,353,140. This was a 173% increase. Through the year 2015, Coshocton County population is projected to decline to 35,400.
b. The total housing units for Coshocton County in the 1990 census was 14,964. The 2000 census showed the number of housing units as 16,107 for an increase of 7.6% over the past decade. The largest percentage increase of housing units over the past 50 years was in the decade of the 70's to the 80's when the increase was 15.7%. This increase directly coincides with the population increase during that time frame. The number of mobile homes in the 2000 census was 2,625 units which accounted for 16.3% of the total housing units. One-unit, detached accounted for 71.6% of the total housing units. The remaining 12.1% represented for two or more units in one complex. The number of homes built prior to 1940 is 30% of the total existing homes. These homes built prior to 1940 are not energy efficient and, considering the cost of utilities, many of these homes will be replaced. The building trend today is using manufactured homes to fill the need for relatively smaller homes (less than 1500 square feet). Most homes more than 1500 square feet are stick-built homes.
c. Although the total number of housing unit needs will not increase, the aging population of the county will require different types of homes be considered. Fifteen percent of county residents are over the age of 64. Also, 7045 residents are considered disabled. Some needs for the aging and disabled residents have been met by recently completed or planned projects. These include a planned retirement community - Summerfields - just being started. It will contain duplex and apartment style residences. Probably up to 250 units will be constructed. Another completed project for senior citizens is Covington Square. It provides duplexes, about 30 housing units, in an area desirable by seniors. It is close to a large market, a doctor’s office, and the County Senior Citizen Center. Windsorwood Place is another senior living unit which provides assisted care to residents. It has a population of 50 people. Another project under construction is the Autumn Care health center. It will provide more intensive care for its residents. Head count will be approximately 120 people. Also completed recently was a manufactured home park in the Village of Warsaw with 50 to 60 sites.
d. Existing planning in the county. A Regional planning office exists but impacts only subdivisions with lots less than five acres. No county-wide building codes or permit systems exist. Permits are required for water and sewer systems. In 1990, one township attempted to implement zoning, but it was defeated decisively at the ballot.
e. Water and Sewer line expansion. Expansion of the city water and sewer line system to outlying areas was started in 1995 with water going to Pleasant Valley. Presently, water and sewer lines are being extended to the North Corridor, approximately a four-mile expansion. Water and sewer extensions are being made just west of Coshocton. The water and sewer lines will have a great impact on where residences will be built. Smaller lots can be used. Presently to have a well and septic system, your lot must be at least one acre.
f. A four-lane highway bisecting Coshocton County from east to west has been partially completed. The road is complete from Coshocton east to Tuscarawas County and Interstate 77. In the planning stages is the project to continue the four-lane from Coshocton to Muskingum County. The overall thrust of this project is to have a four-lane limited access highway from Pittsburgh to Columbus.
g. Planning Tools. A soil study of Coshocton County has been completed. This study will be of great value in determining the best areas to build homes. One thing the soil study will show is which lands are most adaptable to building sites. The study also shows where reclaimed coal mine lands are. Also existing are flood maps outlining where and where not things can be built.
3. Vision
To meet the needs for residential housing in Coshocton County for the next 20 to 25 years. Although total population is not expected to change significantly, older obsolete homes will need replaced and changes in consumer desires must be met. Also, changes in demographics need to be considered. The county needs for residents’ housing are varied and must be met. We identified certain areas of the county as shown on the attached map to be most desirable for residential building.
4. Goals
a. Encourage infrastructure between West Lafayette and Coshocton.
b. Develop county-wide permit and guideline system for home building. This should enhance the quality of life and economic value of property.
c. Educate residents of permits and steps necessary prior to building a home in the county.
d. County-wide water system.
e. Improve traffic flow over highway between West Lafayette and Coshocton - consider service roads.
f. Coordinate and consider increasing permit fees so as to have some control over development.
g. Don’t concentrate entirely on the West Lafayette-Coshocton area, but consider all parts of the county in Plan.
5. Action Plans
a. Recommend that the Coshocton County Commissioners, with coordination of Regional Planning, implement building codes/regulations for the unincorporated areas of the county.
b. Water and sewer lines between West Lafayette and Coshocton on Route 16 should be completed. This is an area with good possibilities for residential development.
c. The water and sewer lines should also spread out in all directions from Coshocton City.
d. Planners should work closely with Metropolitan Housing and the Habitat for Humanity people.
e. Regional Planning should prepare handbook for new residents/home builders that describe steps necessary in buying home or starting home building process. An example of this is the attached “A Guide to Building and Living in Licking County.”
Back to Top
Technology/ Communications Sub-Committee
Committee Chairs: Danny Brenneman and Dan Erb
A. Introduction
Headlines that read “Plant Closing/ 100s Lose Job’s”, make it vital for a community to look at all it’s options for possible growth. One key component to any economic growth for industrial, residential or education areas is technology. Technology can be the deal breaker in a business contract or it could be the key to revitalizing a residential area as a “bedroom community”. No matter what your area of interest in Coshocton County, technology is the glue that will hold it together and the stimulant that will make it grow.
With our mission statement to “create a flexible infrastructure for reliable, affordable world-class communication technology promoting high-tech residential, educational, and commercial entities in Coshocton County, proactively eradicating the digital divide”, our committee will put forth recommendations and ideas to help make this statement a reality.
There are several aspects of technology that will be addressed in this report. It will cover the need to have conduit, to be used for future communication or technology fiber optics, laid and mapped whenever water and sewer systems are installed or replaced. This would allow for easy access for incoming businesses at less cost. Development of an education policy that will inform business as well as the general public of their options for “linking up” at work or at home. The use of telecommunications to work or study from the home or school will be vital in a society that is becoming more family oriented with each generation. The fast approaching use of wireless communication will require dealing with right of way issues and policies that will need to put into place, to allow for maximum coverage and usage. With so many changes in the technology and communications field, the creation of an advisory committee to follow these changes, would only enhance Coshocton’s ability to stay a step ahead of the competition for future economic development.
To better understand the need for technology in Coshocton County, an assessment of the types of telecommunications and business technology that are present was conducted. Unfortunately not all areas of Coshocton County have access to all of the following types of telecommunication and some have none, others have all, but many are in the middle. The committee broke down the types of communication into 3 categories: voice, internet, and television. The voice category consists of land lines, cellular service, citizen band and H.A.M. radio. Landlines are available to the general public and are used by the phone companies. Cellular service is a hit and miss effort. Half of the county is serviced by one cellular company, the other half of the county is serviced by another. There are numerous “dead” spots and many areas that do not receive any service at all. Some of this due to geography but most is due to lack of towers and relay stations. The Internet category consists of dial up services, cellular, wireless, cable, satellite, DSL and T1 lines. Theses are primarily provided by local computer companies or cable services. There are 2 cable companies that service Coshocton County, Time Warner and Adelphia. Time Warner offers internet access through its cable system. At this time Adelphia does not offer internet access in the Coshocton area but it does offer it in the larger cities. Several local computer companies offer internet service through dial up or wireless abilities. The largest internet access is still dial up. Larger national chains offer satellite hook up and SBC offers DSL and T1 line capabilities for more access to the internet. DSL is a recent addition to the Coshocton area through SBC. It provides service for a 3 mile radius from the SBC building on Walnut. T1 lines have been available for some time in Coshocton but are used primarily by businesses and large industry. They involve laying conduit and costly excavating of earth. The final category of telecommunications is television. This form of communication has been around many years.
Unfortunately in Coshocton County not all residents are able to “connect” and receive cable services. This is due largely to geographic reasons but also because of the wide spread rural population of Coshocton County. Satellite and antennae broadcast is a very large portion of the television services provided in our area. This too is due to rural population. Even though it may seem as if we have several forms of telecommunication in place in Coshocton County, we are still very much behind in making it accessible to all county businesses and residents. Wireless and cellular are the two fastest growing forms of telecommunications and we are sadly lacking in both.
This committee feels that if we want to see our county grow and prosper, the land use plan must have a section that addresses and defines what is needed for Coshocton County in the technology area. As the Technology & Communications Task Force we have taken it upon ourselves to make recommendations and supply ideas to bring these changes and to help Coshocton County to grow to its full potential. Following is our report and recommendations to help “proactively eradicate the digital divide” in Coshocton County.
B. Current Communications Availability
The following maps describe the current availability of communication technologies and service areas for Coshocton County.
1) Coshocton Telephone Service Areas
2) Coshocton SBC ADSL Availability
3) Time-Warner RR Availability
4) CloverNet Wireless Coverage
5) Cellphone Towers and Coverage
6) Right Of Ways
7) Electric Service Areas in Coshocton County
C. Goals
1. Establish provisions for a countywide technology advisory committee.
2. Maintain a continuous assessment of communication and technology availability.
3. Advise concerning best practices for use of public right-of-ways and public spaces for technology and communications applications.
4. Explore the availability of multiple technology and communication options to ensure competitiveness.
5. Establish the importance of technology awareness and education to foster community development.
D. Future Development Technology Requirements
1. Economic Development Requirements
Larger corporations are less affected by today’s technology limitations than the smaller businesses. They will spend the money for a T1 line to their place of business. T1 lines are more expensive in Coshocton ($897/mo) compared to cities like Columbus ($99/mo), but this is not a factor for the larger companies.
Small business must rely on DSL connections and cable for an affordable broadband connection. DSL is coming to West Lafayette and Coshocton through SBC, but the Western side of the county is served by Verizon and will not get DSL in the foreseeable future. Cable access is limited to just where current services are located inside the city limits.
Small companies who have traditionally fought technology advances are now being forced by customers and corporate HQ’s to add connectivity or go out of business. Business needs to conduct business-2-business transactions, distance learning, advertising and web site management.
More companies are also open to telecommuting, allowing employees to live in rural areas like Coshocton County, but still maintain an active role in daily business from their homes. In 1990, our county had 2,562 people commuting outside Coshocton to their daily jobs. I am sure that number has grown significantly today due to the many closings of manufacturing plants in the area.
ROI is a problem for technology companies to substantiate the healthy investment required to serve all areas of the county. Business could take a more active roll in promoting the use of technology in the county though workforce training. The Chamber of Commerce could also take a more active role in the promotion of technology to current business. The more people that use existing technology, the more likely technology companies will be open to investing in our area.
2. Housing Telecommunication Requirements
As bandwidth hungry applications emerge and functionality of the Internet user evolves the need for broadband access will become a reality. Some of the current applications that are driving the residential market today are the demand for CD’s for CD players, downloading games for game consoles and VCR tapes for VCR cassettes. By 2005 it is predicted that each person will carry two digital devices such as PDA’s, cell phones, notebooks and PC tablets. This market will drive the wireless revelation that we enable access at virtually any location.
The current workforce is becoming more mobile. Many professionals want to do more work out of the office. There are a growing number of telecommuters. These applications are current driving factors for broadband. These users need a connection to the office LAN so they can share resources and files. With wireless connections the office can be at any location even making a coffee shop a virtual connection to the office.
Broadband deployment will transform the educational marketplace. On-line classes are currently available from most all universities. With broadband in the home students will no longer need to commute to campuses.
3. Water and Sewer Telecommunication Requirements
When beginning grant writing or running water and sewer lines, we need to also make sure that conduit for technology is worked into the grant so that it can be run at the same time for future county development.
E. Best Public Right-of-Way Practices
A goal of the comprehensive land-use plan is to insure fair and proper use of public rights-of-way (ROW) to promote and enhance the county’s technology infrastructure, capability, and availability. The remainder of this section includes recommended best practices for ROW access for service providers, suggested Coshocton County ROW policies, key considerations for managing provider agreements, and a recommended provision for the formation of a standing county technology advisory committee.
1. Best Practices for ROW Access for Service Providers
a. Access to ROW should be extended to all telecommunications providers, as long as they receive authorization from the appropriate unit of government, given that such authorization shall not be unreasonably denied.
b. Government entities should act on a request for authorization to operate and place equipment in the PROW within a reasonable and fixed period of time from the date that the request for such access is submitted.
c. Authorized providers shall apply for construction permits to place equipment in the PROW with the proper unit of government. Such permits shall be processed within a reasonable and fixed period of time from the date that the request for construction is submitted.
d. The proper unit of government reserves the right to receive fair and reasonable compensation from providers that use PROW. Fees charged for PROW access shall be published in writing and made publicly available by request prior to authorization.
e. All providers should be subject to equivalent terms and conditions of access to the PROW, subject to reasonable alternatives in particular cases, such as overcrowding and/or alternate route planning.
f. For management purposes, the appropriate local authority should be able to identify the owner and the location of all facilities in the PROW. The availability of PROW shall be inventoried and made publicly available.
g. PROW construction permits shall not contain unreasonable terms, qualifications, procedures, or other requirements unrelated to the actual management of the PROW. This does not preclude requirements for proof of authorization, indemnification of liability, insurance bonding, or construction route planning.
h. The appropriate unit of government authority may take into account relevant public safety concerns, zoning and planning regulations as long as they do not unreasonably discriminate among service providers.
i. Standard engineering practices should be used to manage construction in the PROW and to guide the development of any engineering standards involving placement of facilities and equipment in the PROW. Standard engineering practices should include consideration for interferences and incompatibilities with current and future planned improvements.
2. Best Practices for Coshocton County ROW policies
The technology advisory committee should help define the following set of uniform ROW management practices and procedures.
a. Coordination of construction schedules.
b. Insurance, bonding and indemnity requirements.
c. Establishment and enforcement of building codes and other public safety codes, including police and fire codes.
d. The tracking of multiple systems that use the rights-of-way, to prevent interference among them.
e. General time, place and manner of construction regulations.
f. Issuance of permits and/or authorization memorandum prior to excavations or construction work.
g. Relocation procedures.
h. Requirements to repair streets and other public infrastructures to return them to their pre-construction condition.
i. Applicant contact information.
j. A proposed construction schedule and construction map.
3. Key Considerations for Managing Provider Agreements
This committee recommends the adoption of the following best practices for managing agreements between providers and state and local government entities.
a. Timing -- Units of government must act on a request for public rights-of-way access within a reasonable and fixed period of time from the date that the request for such access is submitted, or such request must be deemed approved.
b. Clarity -- The specific steps and appropriate documentation (i.e., documentation must relate to ROW management, rather than the financial, technical, or legal qualifications of the provider) necessary to obtain a permit should be clear and in writing. Each unit of government involved in the process, and its specific requirements, should be identified. To the greatest extent possible, the unit of government that issues permits should be centralized, to avoid requiring multiple or duplicative approvals.
c. Cooperation -- Due to constraints on available space in the existing public rights-of-way, due process must be considered to develop solutions that accommodate both the government's concerns and each industry member's service goals and needs.
d. Fees -- The industry agrees that a local government is entitled to recover fees directly related to the costs it actually incurs to manage the right-of-way as a result of the telecommunications provider's activities in the right-of-way. However, local governments do not uniformly agree with the industry concerning the nature and amount of such fees. Consequently, issues relating to appropriate fees potentially create delays in the permit approval process. For this reason, permits should not be conditioned on the payment of fees, but rather the fee issue should be provisioned in the contract or permit and resolved in a separate process.
F. Technology Education
Technology is an integral part of conducting business and every day life. Many governmental agencies and private businesses expect people to “do business” online. Those without the service or knowledge of computers and the Internet are being left behind.
Access to communications technology services, especially high-speed internet connectivity are imperative to the overall well-being of the Coshocton County economy and individual citizens. Equally imperative is a planned campaign to inform and educate our citizenry to become savvy and knowledgeable technology consumers/users.
a. Develop a county-wide resource of current technology services to simplify the process of connecting and ensure competition
b. Develop business education/assistance/incentive programs to encourage technology use
c. Promote and further develop current access points where individuals can attend technology classes and receive information about services available online
d. Identify, develop and promote communication/ media / technology education to prepare our youth for future opportunities
e. Secure Coshocton County representation on regional and state boards and committees associated with technology expansion and education to act as advocates for the development of technology opportunities in our county. (we’ll need to list the boards & committees)
G. Provisions for a Technology Advisory Committee
With the constantly changing face of technology, our committee feels it is imperative for a new advisory entity position, involving a committee, be instituted. This advisory committee would be responsible for keeping the commissioners and other governing bodies appraised and educated, about new telecommunication and technological advances, on a meeting interval to be decided. This committee would be vital to the continued growth for Coshocton County not only for industrial telecommunications but also for residential areas that could become bedroom communities. With the many changes that are happening daily it is very important that the deciding authorities be well informed and updated on the latest advancements. The following will outline basic provisions for the formation and maintenance of such an advisory committee and include a suggested guide for issues to be addressed as well as duties and authority of the committee.
1. Name:
The committee should be named the Coshocton County Technology Advisory Committee
2. Functions:
The committee should serve in advisory capacity to the Coshocton County Commissioners as well as for other public entities that so choose to utilize the committee’s services. The major function of the committee would be to advise the above entities on technology and communication issues for which the county, city or municipality has an interest in promoting technology to foster growth. The committee would also serve to ensure appropriate coordination of projects and events involving technology with other projects of similar interest. The Coshocton County Commissioners may also delegate to this entity other duties such as reviewing proposals and making recommendations on the purchase of equipment, promoting private expansion of technology, and maintenance and upgrades of publicly utilized technology and services. Some specific duties of this committee are as follows:
a. Establish policies and practices for use of Public Rights of way (PROW) including application, review, and processes for such use.
b. Formulate policy and procedure to ensure due emphasis is placed on technology availability when decisions are made to place new water/sewer lines, regulate new and existing housing developments, economic development, and other cooperative improvement efforts.
c. Ensure proper communication, collaboration and awareness among entities (public and private) providing technology/communication services.
d. Promote public awareness of planned technology related projects or procurement.
e. Other specific technology related tasks as assigned by Coshocton County Commissioners.
f. Formulate policies and procedures for use of publicly owned buildings for the placement of private transmission equipment to encourage competition in the industry.
g. Create awareness of and encouragement for increased importance in usage and education of technology.
3. Committee Composition:
This committee should be composed of representatives appointed and/or approved by the Commissioners and should represent both public and private sector. Each should have knowledge and experience in technology/communication issues and have the capacity to adequately advise the Commissioners on such issues.
Note: Should the proposal for such committee be accepted, the following will be considered in creating policies or bylaws to govern the committee and its functions.
a. Process for appointment to the committee
b. Process for resignation or removal
c. Composition /number of appointments/committee positions
d. Conflict of interest policy
e. Meeting schedule/venue
f. Process for reporting or making recommendations to the Commissioners
H. Summary
Back to Top
Tourism Sub-Committee
Committee Chairs: Bob Guilliams and Linda Scott
Committee Members: Mary Ellen Given, Susan Norris, Jerry McKenna, Chester Loos, Gil Hunter, Catherine Howard, Andrea Schweitzer, and Nanci Rogers
I. HISTORICAL ANALYSIS
Tourism as a recognizable industry in Coshocton County was non-existent until the restoration of Historic Roscoe Village in the late 1960’s. In 1980 the Coshocton County Convention and Visitor’s Bureau was established to promote the area. The emergence of interest in the Amish Culture in the 80’s provided enhanced opportunities for tourist travel with Amish settlements located in the North and North Eastern Regions of the County and extending into Holmes, Knox and Tuscarawas Counties. The Early 1990’s saw the nationally promoted AMERIFLORA come to Franklin County. Because there were limited lodging facilities available, tourists traveled to the remote areas seeking food and places to stay, which included Coshocton County. Also in the 1990’s, the expansion of the Longaberger Company, the largest manufacturer of handmade baskets in the USA, with facilities in Muskingum and Licking counties, created marketing opportunities for Coshocton County because of it’s central location between the popular basket manufacturer and Amish country. The construction in the mid-1990’s of several lodging and restaurant facilities improved the county’s position as a destination. In the late 1990’s and 2000, improvements implemented at Coshocton Lake Park, that included the restoration of the Pavilion, construction of the Playvilion, Aquatic Center and development of a recreational trail, provided additional sites to increase tourist traffic. In 2000, the completion of the 4-lane US-36 E highway between Coshocton and Interstate 77 dramatically increased traffic flow through the heart of the county.
It is anticipated that the next quarter century will bring more tourists into the area because of the national trend of families to take shorter, yet more frequent “day” or week-end trips that tend to avoid high population and high-risk destinations.
It is believed that this trend will put pressure on rural and less frequented destinations. This pressure will induce a natural tendency for commercial expansion, and in doing so will also put pressure on the use of land once considered as open space, agricultural or undeveloped.
II. INDUSTRY ANALYSIS
Tourism is vital for the future of Coshocton County. It provides a solid base for growth and development, generating economic benefits as a multi-million dollar industry, leading to new job creation and enhancing quality-of-life by merging the heritage of our past with modern tourism facilities, and providing educational and recreational opportunities for both visitors and residents.
Tourism in Coshocton County includes a range of sites, facilities and events that are diverse. Usage levels of local facilities are greatest in the summer, while promotion of activities in the fall has lengthened the tourist season. Springtime visitation is more site-specific with seasonal availability of limited outdoor facilities. Winter activities have shown low results keyed to negative climate perceptions. Over the past twenty years, we have seen the positive impact tourism has had on Coshocton County. The future of this industry in Coshocton County should be just as bright as its past. We envision the continued development of the Tourism Industry in this county to sharpen its focus around the areas in which we have had proven successes:
Historical Sites
Recreational parks and facilities
Wildlife Sportsmanship
The Tourist is difficult to define. The United States Travel and Tourism Administration generally includes anyone who travels overnight or on a day trip of more than 100 miles within this category. With a diversity of attractions, events and reasons for traveling here, visitors include families, senior citizens, motorcoach tours, outdoor enthusiasts, educational groups, school tours, international visitors, historians, and business, conferences and conventions. These visitors create an economic impact with minimal cost to the community. Local infrastructure serves residents as well as visitors and facilities designed to be attractive to visitors are available for local usage creating a better quality of life for Coshocton County residents.
Based on visitor numbers, Roscoe Village and the Lake Park Complex are at the center of the present Coshocton County Tourism Industry. (Tourism Map/Present) This focus is primarily due to three factors; (1) facility, (2) geographic location, and (3) promotion. A 10-year Traffic Survey (1992-2001) indicates an increase ranging from 10% to 70% in traffic flow at major intersections throughout Coshocton County.
The future focuses on the enhancement and preservation of our historic sites. This would include the preservation of the canal locks and Roscoe Village, the development of our Indian heritage as it relates to tourism and the preservation of historic buildings and sites relevant to Coshocton County history. We believe that there needs to be an understanding of the value of such historic venues to the point that the encroachment of modern development into these areas should be discouraged
Recreational facilities should continue to be a draw for the county. Parks should be established in addition to Lake Park and the community should focus on the continued enhancement of unique park venues throughout the county. Water activities should be enhanced along the three rivers, making use of these scenic waterways.
Sporting venues such as Woodbury, Mohawk Dam and Wills Creek should be developed to call attention to our hunting and sporting competition arenas. The areas around these districts should be developed to encourage tourism-related businesses that are compatible with outdoor sports.
Entertainment and Cultural development should be encouraged in areas where existing and planned infrastructure are suitable. Infrastructure should have sufficient capacity to accommodate the added development without an unreasonable cost to the community after considering the benefits of added jobs and economic enhancement.
It is equally as important that any development is of a standard that contributes to a positive experience for visitors and improves the physical appearance of the county, particularly on major tourist routes. However, commercial facilities must be provided to meet local and tourist demands, but avoid over-excessive, strip-commercial development.
Flexibility is key in the location of tourism facilities. This approach recognizes the contribution that the tourism industry makes to the county’s economy and the need to be innovative and flexible in the development of tourist infrastructure.
III. VISION STATEMENT
Coshocton County’s Tourism Industry will be recognized as a viable and vital segment of the economic future of the community-at-large by maintaining existing tourism ventures, and promoting and encouraging new development.
This shall be accomplished with regard to the surrounding environment and neighboring land uses to preserve its unique heritage, culture and landscape.
IV. NEAR-TERM GOALS, STRATEGIES and RECOMMENDATIONS
GOAL 1
The County will take a position to protect, preserve and/or restore publicly or privately recognized historic sites, landmarks and structures.
STRATEGY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Designate a land border that will be maintained in the land surrounding the restored section of the canal in Lake Park. An ample stretch of land and sufficient tree line should be maintained in the land adjacent to the canal to preserve the aesthetic beauty of the view and the quiet nature of the ride.
2. Develop a plan for the alteration of traffic patterns to decrease traffic flow through Roscoe Village. As the properties at the extension of Hill and High Streets develop, increased motor traffic proportionally increases noise pollution and adds to safety concerns.
3. Preserve the property surrounding the Old Stone Fort along Route 36 as it continues to develop.
4. Develop a plan for the preservation of the Triple Locks. As clearly a one-of-a-kind venue, this unique example of the canal heritage could be further restored as a Park attraction and/or as a very significant teaching tool.
5. Recognizing that adding a historical hotel/landmark building would offer tourists overnight accommodations, encourage the revitalization of the original Park Hotel building in the downtown area.(Tourism Map/City of Coshocton) This would be accomplished by the following: (a) recommend the Mayor protect the building from demolition; (b) encourage the sale of the building with the intention of renovation while offering tax abatements; (c) encourage development of a marketing plan through cooperation of downtown and Towne Center merchants offering evening hours that would accommodate hotel guests with shopping and entertainment options.
GOAL 2
Encourage officials to initiate and enforce appropriate legislation that reduces visual and noise pollution that detracts from Coshocton County’s scenic landscape.
STRATEGY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Land along highways and waterways should be free from accumulations of unsightly debris including billboards, salvage yards, etc.
2. Land should be used to create inviting entrances and exits to municipalities. Create areas of pocket landscaping near signage
3. Uniformity of signage with the creation of a Coshocton County Logo that depicts/supports the historical/cultural philosophy.
V. LONG-TERM GOALS, STRATEGIES and RECOMMENDATIONS
GOAL 1
Encourage the development of a county multi-purpose exhibition center
STRATEGY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Relocate the Coshocton County Fairgrounds to the North Corridor. Construction would include a multi-purpose exhibition center that would be utilized for conventions, private events and recreational opportunities. The facility would be configured to permit the flexibility to handle one large event (trade shows, automobile shows, etc.) or could be broken into smaller venues to accommodate simultaneous events.
GOAL 2
Encourage tourism growth close to municipalities to take advantage of existing and planned infrastructure.
STRATEGY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Guide the development of a technology plan for the county that supports the various technological standards that business travelers and convention planners expect in their host communities. Special attention must be paid to implementing the best possible technological enhancements without infringing on the aesthetic appeal of the county.
2. Identify areas that have ample water/sewer access to accommodate hotels, restaurants, campgrounds, etc. The intersection at SR93 and US36 could serve as the eastern gateway to Coshocton County and northward to Amish Country(Tourism Map/Future).
3. When the four-lane SR16 West is constructed toward Columbus, the municipality of Conesville will be the site of enhanced commercial tourist opportunities. The issues of sewer/water and infrastructure enhancements in that area will be critical to the development of tourism.
GOAL 3
Develop, maintain and improve the quality of surface water resources, utilizing them for recreational sites, where appropriate.
STRATEGY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Encourage ecologically friendly development of the rivers for recreational use.
2. Take an active role in the encouragement of the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District’s efforts to enhance recreational development on MWCD land (Tourism Map/(Future).
3. Encourage development of the Wills Creek area as a recreational asset (Tourism Map/Future) through cooperation with the Wills Creek Conservancy District.
GOAL 4
Encourage conservation of environmentally sensitive areas and promote preservation of natural resources
STRATEGY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Promote the development of cabins, lodges and vacation homes around lakes, parks and natural wildlife to attract vacation tourism and lodging.
2. Analyze the areas in the southern part of the county (those near Wills Creek or adjacent to Woodbury) for potential campground facilities. With the popularity of the Lake Park camping facilities, it would seem that Coshocton County could use more campgrounds. One of these alternate sites would be a nice addition to the park system.
GOAL 5
Encourage development of cultural/entertainment venues in geographic areas where existing & planned infrastructure permits
STRATEGY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Completion of the Coshocton Performing Arts Center complex with construction of parking facility near or adjacent to the venue (Tourism Map/City of Coshocton).
2. Utilizing the natural hill terrain, develop an outdoor amphitheater for plays, concerts, and festivals where geographically feasible.
GOAL 6
Guide tourism growth throughout the county in a way that such growth does not have a negative impact on local municipalities, communities or residents of the county
STRATEGY:
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Establish through the CVB a task force of individuals who would act as consultants for incoming attractions, hotels, etc. hence encouraging coordinated land development.
2. As new venues approach the municipalities for approvals, etc., they will be encouraged to share their plans with other tourism entities in the county to optimize all partnering efforts. As a group, there will be a stronger force to suggest optimum uses of land for tourism.
GOAL 7
Encourage development of wildlife sportsmanship outdoor & recreational opportunities in compatible geographic areas
STRATEGY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Utilizing hill terrain, encourage entrepreneurial development of recreational activities that promote cold weather usage.
2. Encourage development of abandoned strip mine areas for moto-cross (extreme sport) attractions where appropriate.
3. In addition to existing sites, development of remote land to accommodate shooting sports (Sporting Clay Academy).
4. Conversion of abandoned railroad beds to tie-into Rails to Trails.
5. Expansion of Horseback Riding Trails in the Conesville area (Tourism Map/Future) and development of new trails in areas where the terrain is appropriate.
6. Continue the development of bicycle and walking trails for access to tourist attractions including historic sites, parks and recreation venues.
Back to Top
Transportation Sub-Committee
Committee Chairs: Don Brown and Chuck Willis
Committee Members: Rob Duffy, Deb Edwards-Laney, Kathy Hendricks, Gary Keller, Dr. James Kleinknecht, Thomas Novak, Mark Sharrock, Bethel Toler, and Fred Wachtel
Introduction
Coshocton County’s transportation system has evolved over the last 200 years from dirt paths to major 4-lane highways including railroads, paved municipal streets, and an expanded airport. These goals have been developed, revised, and implemented by individuals, committees, and visionaries of Coshocton County. The thoroughfare system in Coshocton County is well established and if, correctly defined, future additions and improvements will enhance the social and economic growth in the area.
The following provides current and future maps for Coshocton County transportation system. This will include a narrative for each future addition and improvement to the existing system. These objectives will be established within the overall Coshocton Land Use Plan.
Vision Statement:
The vision for Coshocton County is to provide a logistical transport system that allows all individuals to travel in the county - efficiently, effectively, and affordably - which will enhance the quality of life.
Goals:
Review the current transportation system:
Highways
County and Township roads.
Rail Road System
Airport
All municipal streets
Purpose is to formulate a future plan on the land use for the logistical transportation system for Coshocton County.
Highways
Currently, there are 1,199 miles of roads within Coshocton and 307 bridges. The miles of roads are designated as follows:
State Highways 224
County Roads 352
Township Roads 623
Any new road right-of-ways for residential, commercial, and industrial developments should be a minimum of 40 feet from the centerline through the property. This will allow sufficient width for future maintenance and expansion if the traffic pattern is warranted.
State Route 16 – 4 Lane Highway:
There will be an expansion of the four-lane highway through Coshocton within the next 20 years on State Route 16. The expansion of the highway will be limited access with minimal interchanges.
The recommendations for this improvement are as follows:
US 36 will need to be improved to possibly 4 lanes from the Village of Warsaw to the intersection of State Route 16 and US 36.
All remaining state highways should have adequate capacity to serve the county citizens for the next 20 years.
ODOT should continue their program of spot safety improvements to reduce hazard areas.
ODOT should improve all their bridges to the legal load limits.
County Roads
All county roads should meet the following requirements:
The township trustees should be encouraged to widen and improve the roads under their jurisdictions, as funds become available.
Platted but never built roads, and built but later abandoned roads should be reviewed and possibly vacated.
City Streets within Coshocton County
The City of Coshocton should construct an overpass from Bank Street traveling West over the Ohio Central railroad and connect into Second Street. This may be connected into the Free Mini-mall. A side street from Brown’s Lane will be made to connect into the new street to allow access over the railroad.
Another railroad crossing should be considered at Pine Street in the City of Coshocton. This will be a gated crossing.
Third Street in the City of Coshocton should be extended to the street where the Stop light is going onto Wal-Mart.
Skyline Heights in the City of Coshocton should be extended to meet Hillcrest Drive. This will alleviate the problem of only having one access to Hillcrest and Ridgewood Drives.
The City of Coshocton should consider the possibility of another access into the town. A bridge could be constructed across the Muskingum River at Brown’s Lane to State Route 16 looking west.
The villages of Warsaw and West Lafayette will continue to make regular improvements to the street as normal. There are no major changes in the future.
All municipalities should consider upgrading all sidewalks to be handicapped accessible. Funding may also be available from the State or Federal governments.
Railroad System
The current railroad system has been in existence since 1855 with upgrades continually being performed. There are 65 miles of track currently in Coshocton County.
Funding needs to be pursued to improve the grade railroad crossings in the county, including the installation of additional gated crossings.
Future plans to be considered are a High Speed Passenger Railroad from Columbus to Pittsburgh, which will travel through Coshocton County.
One main goal for the railroad system - the infrastructure should maintain the current right of way for the double track. Only one track is currently in place. To lose this valuable asset would hinder the development and growth of Coshocton County.
Airport
Currently, the Richard Downing Airport is under going a building improvement and taxiway expansion project. The National Guard will be located at the airport in the near future.
The landing runway is 4,100 feet in length. This needs to be extended to 5,000 feet within the next 5 years.
A new access road to the facility is recommended by the construction of a two lane county road from either CR193 or SR 621. The new road should be considered due to new business development around the Canal Lewisville area. Access to the airport from US 36 via County Road 202 may need to be accomplished by an overhead intersection if the new 4-lane highway becomes a restricted highway.
In addition to the access road to the airport, new funds should be considered for more hangars to be installed. Several Coshocton area pilots are currently storing airplanes at other airports outside of Coshocton County.
Back to Top
Water & Sewage Sub-Committee
Committee Chair: Tom Scott
Committe Member: Don Wells
This report contains recommendations regarding placement and utilization of existing and potential water and sewage lines within Coshocton County. Conclusions utilized in creating this report are a result of having absorbed a vast expanse of available written material on the subject together with attending a number of meetings with a variety of residents plus appointed and/or elected county and state officials. The report is non-partisan in nature. It is hoped and anticipated it will be accepted in that context.
Currently the City of Coshocton and the villages of West Lafayette and Warsaw provide water and sewer lines to segregated sections of our County. None of the various utilities are at maximum capacity.
It is highly recommended that elected county, city, village and township officials come together in an environment of open compromise in establishing a common goal of creating an integrated countywide water and sewer district. It is further recommended that such a goal setting agenda evolve in an atmosphere explicitly void of the isolationist/segregationist attitude that is prevalent within our county today. This attitude has severely hampered the current and potential commercial and residential growth within Coshocton County. Growth has also been substantially hampered by the inability of various existing appointed committees to recognize one another and work together.
In establishing such a countywide district, it is recommended that water and sewer lines be designated for placement and/or expansion within those areas of the county identified herein as viable growth areas by our committee. Again, this plan must rid itself of the existing thinking within certain municipal areas that has limited the creation of a viable countywide water and sewer plan.
It is our recommendation that water and sewer lines be extended the entire length of the existing four-lane “route 36 corridor” northeasterly to county line, to tie in with existing lines running from 36 to West Lafayette, as well as to other identified areas of existing or potential growth patterns. These identified/recommended areas are as follows:
• State Route 16 from Coshocton southwesterly to county line
• State Route 36 from Coshocton northwesterly to county line
• County Road 16 from Coshocton easterly to county line
In doing so, Coshocton County will be taking a giant stride in becoming a viable player and entity within Ohio’s growth into the 22nd century. A multitude of grants and alternative financing plans are available to municipalities to utilize in expanding existing water and sewer lines. These financial vehicles are in a flux of constant change, and are available from Federal and State agencies, as well as certain private sectors. We have elected to not include a listing of the agencies that provide these various financial vehicles. It is the opinion of our subcommittee that a countywide committee must be formed to aggressively research, apply for and garner these types of funding.
In closing, we are of the opinion a non-partisan, united effort by elected officials within our entire county can result in the procurement of funding to facilitate an infrastructure of water and sewer lines in a manner that will vastly enhance the systematic evolution of commercial and residential growth within our county. This type of united county infrastructure, together with a commitment to establish mutually beneficial planning and working relationships with adjoining counties, will prove critical to our Land Use Report attaining maximum potential.
We recognize the absolute need for our completed Land Use Report to be acknowledged by elected county officials as a vehicle to be utilized as a constant source of reference and direction in the systematic evolution of Coshocton County’s growth. It is our sincere desire to see that our Land Use Report does not fall victim to its predecessor; being set aside to collect dust and be ignored by existing and future elected officials. We take pride in the efforts of our subcommittee in providing our recommendations. We sincerely hope the unwavering efforts and commitment provided by every member of the various subcommittees that contributed to our Land Use Report are recognized and respected by those elected officials to whom it is entrusted.
Back to Top
Committee Chair: Wendell Waters
Committee Members: George Eberwine, Jim Schumaker, Steve Finton, Evangeline
Croft, David Gilmore, Adrian Garber, Garry Derr, Rhoda Crown, and Teresa Bradford.
Introduction and Historical Background:
A land use survey of Coshocton County was completed by the Planning Consultant in the Summer of 1968 in conjunction with the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan. The survey showed that land used for agricultural purposes, or which is essentially undeveloped, accounts for about 89 percent of the County’s total 362,250 acres. Other types of development including recreation areas, strip mines, rights of way and all urban development, utilize the remaining 39,350 acres or 11 percent of the land. In 1970 Comprehensive Plan there were 90,000 acres of land in cropland, 75,000 acres in pasture and 149,000 acres in forest. In addition to the Woodbury Wildlife Area and the large areas of raw land, there are many other less known areas of scenic beauty throughout the County.
The 1970 Plan concluded – The growth of average farm size and the use of modern technology have contributed to the development of a strong commercial base in the agricultural sector of Coshocton County. The strength of this base has meant the continuing importance of agricultural sector of Coshocton County. The strength of this base has meant the continuing importance of agricultural activity to the County economy. At the same time, the number of agricultural workers required to produce the increasing sales levels has declined thus increasing the potential labor force available to other sectors of the economy. It was anticipated that by 1990, the number of agricultural jobs in Coshocton County will have decreased to between 750 and 1000.
In 1982, the Coshocton Soil and Water Conservation District and USDA, Soil Conservation Service completed a Natural Resources Inventory for Coshocton County Land Use. The report indicated the following: Cropland 101,500 acres; pastureland 65,600 acres; forest land 152,200 acres, urban land 9,600 acres and other land 32,500 acres. The report also indicated Coshocton County has about 57,000 acres of prime farmland. Prime Farmland soils are defined as the best suited to producing food, fiber, forage, feed and oilseed crops. Prime farmland soils produce the highest yields with the minimal inputs of energy and economic resources. Farming these soils results in the least damage to the environment.
Please see the attached table showing Coshocton County – Census of Agriculture
Vision and Goals:
The Agricultural Task Force is dedicated to the Vision of:
• Preserving Prime Farmland
• Promoting agricultural value of Prime Farmland to competing land users and decision makers
• Making it a priority that agricultural operations be:
- Economically sustainable
- Environmentally sustainable
- Socially acceptable to the community
The Agricultural Task Force established the following Goals to provide direction for future land use changes and insure that those changes are made so that strong economic gains are achieved.
Goal 1: “Smart Development” in Coshocton County
STRATEGY
• Insure cooperation with the local Soil and Water Conservation District to provide soil and water evaluation, and that those factors can support the proposed land change needs. This information would help form regulation guidelines for Health board representatives. Realtors, banking interests, and other planning agencies.
• Protection and preservation of prime land for agricultural production is greatly facilitated by encouraging and maintaining cooperation and coordination among political subdivisions - Municipalities, townships, and counties can best help reserve farmland by working together and by using a comprehensive land use plan. (See attached map with prime and important farmland)
• It is important not to facilitate development by extending water and sewer lines into areas of prime agricultural land. Homeowners and businesses who plan to build commonly follow the extension of infrastructure into rural areas. However, if it is deemed necessary to extend infrastructure into areas of prime agricultural land, this should be undertaken as carefully as possible in order to minimize resulting negative impacts on agricultural activity.
• Choose residential building standards which discourages excessive lot sizes. This would help reduce the amount of farmland being used for residential purposes.
• Clustered development for residential housing deserves serious consideration. Such dwellings, nucleated in a small area or agglomeration, use less land, keep houses at a distance from farm operations, reduce the amount of necessary infrastructure, and cause less disruption to and impact upon the overall landscape.
Goal 2: Green Space Protection
STRATEGY
• Prime land for agricultural production should be encouraged, preserved and protected to the maximum extent by utilizing all possible and applicable incentives. One method to preserve prime farmland includes maintaining, extending and creating new agricultural districts in which agricultural activity, even within urban systems, is taxed at a lower rate than urban land use activities. Another method is to implement the recent legislation that allows local governments to purchase development rights from farmers. In these ways agriculture can continue as a valued and productive way of life and major feature of landscape.
• Encourage landowners to enroll in the Ag District designation
• Work to establish a reclamation plan for former gravel and mining areas to create recreational areas for hunting, fishing and other recreational opportunities.
• Establish guidelines to prevent former mining areas from being converted into possible less favorable commercial uses: i.e. “landfills”
Goal 3: Provide Adequate Transportation Opportunities Under Changing Major Highway Layout
STRATEGY
• As the major highway system is restructured to allow faster movement for automobile and truck traffic, secondary roads should be provided to allow efficient access to agricultural and commercial areas.
Agricultural Task Force Summary
Progress of the agriculture committee has centered on the evaluation of current agricultural resources. Committee members have evaluated census data since 1980 noting a relatively stable number of farms (1050 to 930) with median farm size changing from 195 to 182 acres. The cash receipts per farm rose from only $22,000 to $40,000. These figures include part-time farmers and hobby farmers. These statistics alone cannot be used to measure the economic viability of agriculture in Coshocton County to the commercial farmer.
Our committee has greatly benefited from the information available at the Coshocton Soil and Water Conservation District Office. Maps are available which designate the prime and important soils within our county (see attached). USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service by request of the Coshocton SWCD and Coshocton County Commissioners recently completed the Coshocton Soil Survey. The Soil Survey provides detailed predictions of soil behavior for selected land uses and highlights soil limitations, improvements needed to overcome limitations, an the impact of selected land uses on the environment. The Agricultural Task Force encourages all public officials to use this valuable information in assessing the adaptability of land for it intended use.
An effective land use plan addresses and incorporates all significant local issues and priorities, but must also be based on the land and it natural resources. Land use planning is both a social science and physical and biological science. Failure to consider the natural environment can result in cost overruns, increased runoff and flooding, environment degradation, construction delays, and expensive planning mistakes.
The USDA-NRCS has at the request of the Coshocton Soil and Water Conservation District provided a list of soil map units reflecting those soil types of significant influence on our local agriculture economy. If a plan of farmland preservation would be adopted, these soil map units would help in qualifying or not qualifying land for this purpose. (See attached map showing prime and important soils of Coshocton County).
It is the hope and intent of the Agricultural Task Force to forestall the loss of agriculture land for non-agriculture purposes. Examples would be gravel pits, coal mining, unrestricted housing developments, and in general the urban sprawl that is so prevalent in today’s environment.
Efforts still are needed to develop written documentation supporting farmland preservation. Gravel removal is seen as a major detriment to retaining prime farmland and the aesthetics of major areas within our County.
Back to Top
Cultural Resources Sub-Committee
Chair: Paul Prater
Vision Statement:
To maintain and enhance the cultural experiences within Coshocton County. Exploring the past with a view towards the future.
Narrative on the County
In the westernmost reaches of the Appalachian foothills, two rivers have carved their converging paths to form a third, larger valley that channels their waters first to the Ohio, then to the Mississippi and, finally, the Gulf of Mexico.
The names of the three rivers - Walhounding, Tuscarawas, Muskingum - and the name, "Coshocton," as well, are reminders that, in centuries past, the area that is now Coshocton County was a center of Indian culture and was once the capital of the Delaware nation.
Throughout the centuries, man has traveled these valleys - by canoe and by horseback, then by wagon, canal boat, railroad and now by motor vehicle and in the air.
During the Indian's residence, the rivers were their highways through virgin forests so dense they kept the creatures of the woods in semi-darkness from spring to fall.
In the autumn of 1764, the valley was the path for some two thousand British soldiers and Lieutenant Colonel Henry Bouquet who came to secure the release of more than two hundred settlers who had been held prisoner by the Indian tribes then waging the Pontiac War.
During the mid-1800's, Irish and German immigrants scraped the Ohio-Erie Canal out of the valley floor. The "Big Ditch," which connected the Great Lakes to the Ohio River, would bring to the valley the sixth President of the United States, John Quincy Adams.
Later in the century, railroads came into the valley, also following the rivers' natural excavations. Ironically, canal boats carried the rails to build the roadbeds for the next generation of transportation - one that would render the canal itself obsolete.
Trees still line these fertile valleys, providing a haven for the abundant wildlife that has flourished here since before the Indians' reign. The vigorous commercial ventures of those who now call Coshocton County home also flourish.
From the website of http://www.snowcrest.net/~mikennancy/finneygen/cosh.html
Unique Community Events
Ice Carving Festival
Tiverton Institute
Dogwood Festival
Hot Air Balloon Festival
Dulcimer Days
Coshocton Canal Festival
Coshocton County Fair
Apple Butter Stirrin’
Fall Foliage & Farm Tour
Festival of Trees
Christmas Candle Lighting
Other Cultural Activities in Coshocton County
Pomerene Center for the Arts
Johnson Humrickhouse Museum
Triple Locks Theatre
Coshocton County Library System
Community Choirs
House of Jacob Headquarters
Buildings listed on the National Register of Historical Places in Coshocton County
- Chalfant Church (added 1982 - Building - #82004416) S of Warsaw off OH 60, Warsaw
- Coshocton County Courthouse ** (added 1973 - Building - #73001402) Courthouse Sq., Coshocton
- Eldridge--Higgins Building (added 1998 - Building - #98001012) Also known as Higgins Building 525 Orange St., Coshocton
- Ferguson, Andrew, House (added 1978 - Building - #78002028) E of West Lafayette on OH 751, West Lafayette
- Helmick Covered Bridge ** (added 1975 - Structure - #75001348) E of Blissfield on Twnshp. Rd. 25, Blissfield
- Johnson, Thomas, House (added 1982 - Building - #82004415) OH 541, Plainfield
- Johnson-Humrickhouse House (added 1974 - Building - #74001424) Also known as Pomerene House 302 S. 3rd St., Coshocton
- Lamberson-Markley Houses (added 1984 - Building - #84000125) 713 Main St., Canal Lewisville
- Lee, Samuel, House (added 1979 - Building - #79001796) 306 4th St, Coshocton
- Meek, J.F., Buildings (added 1985 - Building - #85000033) 546 Chestnut St. and 213-215 N. Sixth St., Coshocton
- Miller, Daniels, House (added 1980 - Building - #80002967) W of West Lafayette at 52357 SR 16, West Lafayette
- Milligan, Cuthbert, House (added 1980 - Building - #80002966) Also known as Old Stone House; Sandstone House N of Coshocton, Coshocton
- Nichols, Eli, Farm (added 1982 - Building - #82001364) Also known as Wolf Pen Springs Address Restricted, Howard
- Old Union School (added 1984 - Building - #84000127) Also known as Sycamore School;Johnson-Humrickhouse Museum, 310 Sycamore St., Coshocton
- Rodrick Bridge *** (added 1998 - Structure - #78002027) 8.5 mi. (13.6 km) SE of Coshocton, Coshocton (this bridge has been restored and is now located at OSU Newark on a walking path)
- Roscoe Village ** (added 1973 - District - #73001403) Whitewoman and High Sts., Coshocton
- Walhounding Canal Lock No. 9 ** (added 1986 - Structure - #86000307) Also known as Gamble's Lock OH 715, Warsaw
- Warsaw Hotel (added
1994 - Building - #94000244) Also known as Commercial Hotel/Sanitarium
102 E. Main St., Warsaw
Demographic Profile Sub-Committee
Committee Chair: Catherine Miller
Our report will follow the outline listed below. It will provide for as much of the factual statistics and projections that is available as of this time.
I. Map of Ohio with a star on Coshocton County
II. Map of Coshocton County with each Township designated
III. History of Coshocton County (narrative format)
IV. Regional Structure:
A. Surrounding Counties (specific features relevant to Coshocton County)
B. Accessibility to metropolitan areas
C. Population
1. townships
2. vital statistics
3. trends (historical, township, household, employment)
4. population characteristics (income, socio-economic, age, racial/ethnic, residency, school, educational attainment, ancestry, labor force, occupation, households)
population projections (general)
Regional Context
This section will focus on the regional perspective relative to Coshocton County. This presentation will address population of the counties and the economic trends which would be relative to Coshocton County.
Regional Structure
Coshocton County is located in the east-central portion of the state. US 36 & 16 and SR 541 cross the county east and west and State Routes 60, 83, 93 & 206 run north and south. State Route 83 connects with Interstate 70, about 20 miles south of Coshocton. SR 83 also connects with US 36, now being linked with the new 4-lane highway to Interstate 77, about 20 miles east of Coshocton, and SR 83 connects with SR 16 one mile west of the county’s industrial park.
Coshocton, one of 88 counties in Ohio, is ranked 67th in population according to the 2000 census. Coshocton is not a part of a metropolitan area. (A metropolitan area as defined by the 2000 census of population and housing is an area comprised of a large urbanized area with a population of one million or more that would have significant economic and social interrelationship to the immediate area). Therefore, the closest metropolitan area to Coshocton County is the Columbus area. With the East-West corridor passing through Coshocton County, Columbus is within approximately 1½ hours driving time. The Cleveland-Akron metropolitan area is within approximately 2 1/4 to 2 ½ hours driving time. These metropolitan areas provide more social relationships to our county (arts, shopping, major sporting events, etc.) than an immediate economic impact because of driving distances for day to day employment.
The counties surrounding Coshocton are as follows: Tuscarawas county to the east, Holmes to the north, Muskingum to the south, Knox to the nothwest. Small sections of our county touch Guernsey to the south east and Licking to the west.
Population
The 2000 census listed the population of these surrounding counties as 462,969. Coshocton contributed 36,655 persons (7.3 percent) to this regional population making a total of 499,624 persons in the seven county area. Coshocton county ranks 7th in this regional area.
Table 1.1
Regional Population Change
1990 2000 Actual Percent
County Population Population Change Change
Coshocton 35,427 36,665 1,238 3.5
Guernsey 39,024 40,792 1,768 4.5
Holmes 32,849 38,943 6,094 18.6
Knox 47,473 54,500 7,027 14.8
Licking 128,300 145,491 17,191 13.4
Muskingum 82,068 84,585 2,517 3.1
Tuscarawas 84,090 90,914 6824 8.1
Source: Office of Strategic Research, Ohio Department of Development, 2000
Population
Historic trends
This section begins with a review of population trends for Coshocton County over the past 50 years. It will include individual township population over the past decade as well as findings on housing and employment.
Population
The net population change in Coshocton County from 1950 to 2000 was 5,514 which is an increase of 17.7 %. The greatest growth increase occurred between 1970 and 1980. The rate of growth has been rather stagnant since 1980, even a decrease from 1980-1990. It is interesting to note that the growth for the state of Ohio was a 42.9 % increase for the period of time from 1950 to 2000. (Population in 1950 for Ohio was 7,946,627 and the 2000 population was 11,353,140).
Table 2.1
Population trends over past 50 years for Coshocton County
Year Coshocton County Actual Change Percent Change
1950 31,141 ----- -----
1960 32,224 1,083 3.5
1970 33,486 1,262 3.9
1980 36,024 2,538 7.6
1990 35,427 (597) (1.7)
2000 36,655 1,228 3.5
Source: Ohio Department of Development Office of Strategic Research, 2000
The actual population by townships from 1990-2000 indicates growth in 20 of 22 townships. This excludes Coshocton City which had a decrease in population of 511 persons (12,193 in the 1990 census to 11,682 in the 2000 census) for a 4.2% decrease. The following table illustrates the change in population for the townships of the county for the last decade.
Table 2.2
Township population from 1990 to 2000
Actual Percent
Township 1990 census 2000 census Change Change
Adams 595 755 160 26.8
Bedford 499 601 102 20.4
Bethlehem 1,163 1,191 28 2.4
Clark 578 594 16 2.8
Crawford 1,221 1,594 373 30.5
Franklin 1,376 1,286 (90) (6.5)
Jackson 1,947 2,045 98 5.0
Jefferson 1,383 1,549 166 12.0
Keene 1,583 1,689 106 6.7
Lafayette 4,140 4,285 145 3.5
Linton 611 632 21 3.4
Mill Creek 540 747 207 38.3
Monroe 399 452 53 13.3
Newcastle 387 441 54 13.9
Oxford 1,512 1,560 48 3.2
Perry 408 513 105 25.7
Pike 411 550 139 33.8
Tiverton 291 348 57 19.6
Tuscarawas 2,151 1,798 (353) (16.4)
Virginia 525 636 111 21.1
Washington 533 629 96 18.0
White Eyes 981 1,078 97 9.9
Source: Factfinder.US Census.gov
A overall view of the population would indicate that households are moving to the rural area away from the industrialized areas. The opening of the North corridor will tend to increase significant population numbers to the north and east, especially with the opening of Summerfields and Walnut Hills Estate. One would expect a definite increase in Keene township.
Housing
The total housing units for Coshocton County in the 1990 census was 14,964. The 2000 census showed the number of housing units as 16,107 for an increase of 7.6 % over the past decade. The largest percentage of housing units over the last 50 years was in the decade of the 70's to the 80's when the increase was 15.7 %. This increase directly coincides with the population increase during that time frame. The number of mobile homes in the 2000 census was 2,625 units which accounted for 16.3 % of the total housing units. One-unit, detached accounted for 71.6 % of the total housing units. The remaining 12.1 % accounts for 2 or more units in one complex.
Employment
Civilian Labor Force is comprised of civilians 16 years of age and over who are working or seeking work. It excludes military personnel, persons in institutions, those studying or keeping house full-time, persons who are retired or unable to work and volunteer workers.
The 2000 annual civilian labor force estimates for Coshocton County were: total labor force - 17,500, employment - 16,600, unemployment -900, and unemployment rate - 5.0. Coshocton County ranked thirty-second in unemployment among Ohio’s 88 counties.
Table 2.3 Employment by Industry
In 2000, the total employment for all industries in Coshocton County was 13,390 with the Manuafacturing industry claiming the largest portion-31.5 percent.
Source: Ohio Department of Development prepared by the Office of Strategic Research, 2000
Table 2.4 Labor Market Information for the past 30 years for Coshocton County
Civilian
Labor Unemployment
Year Force Employment Unemployment Rate
1970 15,000 14,300 700 4.7
1980 16,300 15,400 1,000 5.9
1990 16,000 14,900 1,100 6.9
2000 17,400 16,100 1,300 7.7
2003 16,700 ` 15,300 1,400 8.6
Source: Labor Market Information.state.oh.us as of January, 2003
Income
Per Capita Personal Income*
In 2000, Coshocton had a per capita personal income (PCPI) of $21,898. This PCPI ranked 58th in the State, and 78 percent of the State average $27,977. In 1990, the PCPI of Coshocton was $14,440 and ranked 63rd in the State. The average annual growth rate of PCPI over the past 10 years was 4.3 per cent while the average growth rate for the State was 4.1 percent. 717 families in Coshocton county were reported below the poverty level (5.0%). The state percentage below poverty level was 5.3 %.
Table 2.5 Household Income for 1999 as reported on the 2000 census
Coshocton State of
Category County Percent Ohio Percent
No. of Households 14,344 4,446,621
Less than $10,000 1,355 9.5 406,698 9.1
$10,000 to $14,999 1,153 8.0 285,372 6.4
$15,000 to $24,999 2,340 16.3 594,143 13.4
$25,000 to $34,999 2,391 16.7 602,996 13.6
$35,000 to $49,999 2,745 19.1 771,129 17.3
$50,000 to $74,999 2,657 18.5 905,323 20.4
$75,000 to $99,999 1,089 7.6 444,599 10.0
$100,000 to $149,999 445 3.1 289,049 6.5
$150,000 to $199,999 100 0.7 71,062 1.6
$200,000 or more 69 0.5 76,250 1.7
Source: factinder.census.gov 2000 cen
Total Personal Income*
In 2000, TPI (total personal income) ranked Coshocton County 66th in the State of Ohio and accounted for 0.3 percent of the State total. In 1990, the TPI ranked Coshocton County 65th in the State. The average annual growth rate of TPI over the past 10 years for Coshocton County was 4.6 percent. The average annual growth rate for the State was 4.5 % and for the Nation was 5.5 %.
Earnings by Industry*
The largest industry for Coshocton County in 2000 was nondurable goods manufacturing, 19.2 percent of earnings; services, 18.9 percent; and durable goods manufacturing, 16.2 percent. In 1990, the largest industries were nondurable goods manufacturing, 26.8 percent of earnings; durable goods manufacturing; 16.1 percent; and services, 15.2 percent. Of the industries that accounted for at least 5 percent of earnings in 2000, the slowest growing from 1990 to 2000 was nondurable goods manufacturing, which increased at an average annual rate of 0.9 percent; the fastest was services, which increased at an average annual rate of 6.6 percent.
*oh.profiles.iastat.edu/bearfacts from the Regional Economic Information System
POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS
The following describes the general population of Coshocton County. Data were gathered from the 1990 and 2000 Census of Population and Housing. These data were analyzed to determine descriptive attributes of the population, such as age, racial composition, school enrollment, educational attainment, and ancestry.
Overview
The 2000 population in Coshocton County was reported as 36,655. The urban population accounted for approximately 34.4 percent and the rural population was approximately 65.6 percent. Residents classified in the farm population totaled about 6.2 percent. The male population accounted for 48.8 percent(17,905) and the female population was 51.2 percent (18,750). Coshocton County compares quite closely to the state with regard to percentages of persons in the various age categories. The state population (11,363,140) of male/female percentages is also very close to Coshocton County. The state male population (368,070) comprises 48.5 % of the population while the female population (399,532) is 51.5%.
It is interesting to note that the percentages of persons 60 to 85 and over is 2.4 % higher for Coshocton County than the state of Ohio.
Age
Table 3.1 summarizes the age groups in Coshocton County as well as for the State of Ohio for 2000.
Table 3.1
2000 Age Characteristics
Coshocton State
Age County Percent of Ohio Percent
Under 5 2,351 6.4 753,172 6.6
5-9 2,620 7.1 816,215 7.2
10-14 2,848 7.9 831,032 7.3
15-19 2,800 7.6 804,052 7.1
20-24 1,848 5.0 736,929 6.5
25-34 4,365 11.9 1,513,761 13.3
35-44 5,661 15.4 1,822,236 16.1
45-54 5,066 13.8 1,560,185 13.7
55-59 1,900 5.2 554,342 4.9
60-64 1,821 5.0 453,121 4.0
65-74 2,860 7.8 796,240 7.0
75-84 1,936 5.3 539,990 4.8
85 and over 579 1.6 131,865 1.5
Coshocton County Median Age 37.8
Source: Factfinder.census.gov. 2000Census
Racial Composition
Coshocton county’s racial composition was predominately white, including 97.4 % (35,685) of all persons.
Black or African-American accounted for 1.1% (399) of the county’s population.
American Indian and Alaska Native - 0.2% (62).
Asian and the Pacific Islanders - 0.4 % (128)
Hispanic- 0.6 % (216)
Other - 0.3 % (165)
School Enrollment
Persons three years and over are included in the school enrollment characteristics. The breakdown of the age categories in the 1990 census varies from the 2000 census. This makes it difficult to do a comparison; however, the 1990 census shows approximately 82.3 % of the total enrollment in the kindergarten/elementary/high school category. The 2000 census shows 83.7% in that same age population. The State of Ohio percentage in that category is 71.6 %. School enrollment for the kindergarten/elementary/high school category in Coshocton County is 12 % higher than the state. Coshocton County percentages are higher in all categories except college. The new branch college in Coshocton should help the county show an increase in this category. Also noted, more students were enrolled in private schools at the state level. From my research, this enrollment does not necessarily address home schooling.
Table 3.2 2000 School Enrollment Characteristics*
Coshocton Category State of Category
Categories County Per Cent Ohio Per Cent
Enrolled in school 8,641 3,014,460
Nursery School, 648 7.5 204,086 6.8
Preschool
Kindergarten 501 5.8 163,537 5.5
Elementary School 4,562 52.8 1,349,361 44.7
Grades 1-8
High School 2,172 25.1 645,083 21.4
Grades 9-12
College Enrollment 758 8.8 539,392 17.9
Graduate, Professional --- ----- 113,001 3.7
* Actual figures are approximate
Source: Factfinder.census.gov. (School Enrollment)
Education
Educational attainment characteristics have been collected from the 1990 and 2000 census. Persons 25 years and older are included in this data. The data found that those with a high school diploma dominated the educational classifications at both the Coshocton County and state level. Coshocton County shows one half of the population with only a high school diploma while the state shows a little over one third. Coshocton County’s percentage increased in the ten year decade from 1990 to 2000. Table 3.3 shows a percentage comparison for Coshocton County between 1990 and 2000.
Table 3.3 Educational attainment characteristics for Coshocton County (Age 25 and over population)
Category 1990 Percent 2000 Percent
Less than a H.S. diploma 6,559 28.7 5,148 21.3
High School graduate 10,968 47.9 12,356 51.1
Some college-no degree 2,679 11.7 3,209 13.3
Associate degree 809 3.5 1,093 4.5
Bachelor’s degree 1,309 5.7 1,533 6.4
Graduate or Professional 554 2.4 833 3.4
Degree
Source: Factfinder.census.gov. 1990 & 2000 census
The following table shows a comparison between Coshocton county and the state percentages as taken from the data of the 2000 census.
Table 3.4 Educational attainment characteristics for Coshocton County and the State of Ohio (Age 25 and over population)
Category Coshocton Percent Ohio Percent
Less than a H.S.diploma 5,148 21.3 1,262,085 17.0
High School graduate 12,356 51.1 2,674,551 36.1
Some college-no degree 3,209 13.3 1,471,964 19.9
Associate degree 1,093 4.5 439,608 5.9
Bachelor’s degree 1,533 6.4 1,016,256 13.7
Graduate or Professional 833 3.4 547,275 7.4
Degree
Source: Factfinder.census.gov. 2000 census
Ancestry
Of the 36,655 Coshocton County residents, the highest percentage responded as being of German background (24.5 %). The majority (36,187 persons or 98.7 %) were born in the United States. Resident population of 5 years and older were questioned regarding language spoken in the home. Responses indicated that 32,007 persons or 93.3 % spoke only English.
Table 3.5 2000 Ancestry Characteristics
Ancestry Number Percent
German 8,993 24.5
U.S. or America 5,282 14.4
Irish 3,751 10.2
English 3,689 10.1
French (except Basque)755 2.1
Italian 682 1.9
Miscellaneous/ 13,503 36.8
Other Ancestries
Source: Factfinder.census.gov
POPULATION PROJECTIONS
Population projections for Coshocton County were released by the Ohio Department of Development in July, 2003 for the years from 2000 through 2030. The projections for the county continue to be indicative of the historical trends from 1950-2000, that of stability. Coshocton will likely experience very slow growth over the next 30 years. This projected population is only a 2.6% increase over the 30 year period. Table 4.1 will show this slow increase.
Table 4.1 Population projections for Coshocton County
Year Population % Change
2000 36655
2005 36890 .6% I
2010 37070 .5% I
2015 37420 .9% I
2020 37700 .7% I
2025 37820 .3% I
2030 37610 .6% D
Source: Ohio Department of Development Office of Strategic Research, July, 2003
Though Coshocton county’s population is expected to remain stable, the county will experience a larger share of residents who reach 65 or older. In the year 2000, the population of age 65 and over was 5,380. Table 4.2 shows the projection for this age group.
Table. 4.2 Population projection for age 65 and older.
Year Population % Change
2000 5380
2005 5520 2.6% I
2010 5580 1.0% I
2015 6070 8.8% I
2020 6650 9.6% I
2025 7370 10.8% I
2030 7740 5.0%I
Source: Ohio Department of Development, Office of Strategic Research, July, 2003
This amounts to an increase of 43.8% over the 30 year time frame for this age group.
For this same time frame, the opposite end of the spectrum age (0-9), there is a projected decrease of 7 %. Table 4.3 shows this data.
Table 4.3 Population projections for age 9 and under.
Year Projections % Change
2000 4970
2005 4690 5.6% D
2010 4540 3.2% D
2015 4860 7.0% I
2020 4950 1.9% I
2025 5020 1.4% I
2030 4620 8.0% D
Source: Ohio Department of Development, Office of Strategic Research, July, 2003.
The projected population of aged persons versus ages 0 - 9 is typical since the general population is living longer.
As one takes a look at the individual townships from 1960 through 2000, there are slight increases in all townships except Tuscarawas and Jackson. The census records noted this was due largely to the annexation of parts of this territory to Coshocton City. Much of the village of West Lafayette (largest incorporated village in the county) had a 57% increase due to the annexation of surrounding areas of this village. The remaining incorporated villages in the county (Conesville, Nellie, Plainfield, and Warsaw) showed an insignificant amount of population change.
These projections could change as the north corridor develops. Water lines from the Village of West Lafayette to Route 36 could also have an impact on development and population increase.
IMPORTANT ISSUES TO BE CONSIDERED
The following are key points regarding demographics. The population changes do affect housing, employment, health issues, education, and economic trends.
- The county population is expected to remain stable; however the county’s residents will be older.
- Households are moving to the rural areas.
- The county will experience very slow growth unless measures are taken to stimulate growth through industry which would bring employees and their families to the area.
Back to Top
Economic Development Sub-Committee
Committee Chairs: Paul Prater and Dick Totsch
Committee Members:
Vision Statement of the Economic Development Committee:
To Assist in providing an economic stimulus that will provide for and encourage employment, travel and tourism, and agricultural growth for the betterment of Coshocton County.
Coshocton County has a rich history of agriculture, tourism and industry. The county developed along its rivers and canals. Agriculture has played a major role in its development and still does today. Industrial and commercial facilities have developed, expanded with some leaving and others continuing to prosper.
Coshocton County Today
Coshocton County today has a solid agricultural, tourism and industrial base which provides a stable economy for the county. In looking at today from a perspective of development of the commercial and industrial base the following are some observations:
The Economic Development Committee looked at Coshocton County township by township. South of the City of Coshocton there are many locations with have underground mines some are marked, some are not. (See county map)
Flood plain areas around the three rivers in the county and behind the Mohawk and Willscreek Dams limit development in these areas. The Woodbury Wildlife preserve encompasses 19,000 acres in the west central part of the county.
The townships in the county without access to state routes or water and sewer will not be able to support industry or large commercial development. They will develop as small rural type agricultural enterprises or bedroom communities to the other more developed areas.
Water and sewer access in the North Corridor will feed expansion of the airport, Summerfields retirement community and other projects such as light industrial or commercial development. Highway access in this area is also excellent.
Tuscarawas Township, Pleasant Valley Area we see annexation into the city of Coshocton and light and heavy industrial development. This area has access to rail, power, natural gas, highways and is also located near to 2 trucking companies.
Lafayette township, we envision light industrial development possibly at the old Penn-Michigan site or with the extension of water and sewer to the areas adjacent to the Village of West Lafayette and extending East to State Route 751. Water already has been extended North along State Route 93 crossing under Route 36.
The Northwestern part of the county is bordered by Holmes County and there is a growing Amish population. We see development of agriculture, tourism and small entrepreneurial operations.
We envision agriculture as an important part of our county and the need for a land fill may need to be addressed.
All development: industrial commercial, residential etcetera may require that zoning play a very important part in the future, which we as a committee recommend as development increases.
Back to Top
Environmental Resources Sub-Committee
Committee Chair: Donna R. Young
“A Native American Proverb says “We have not inherited the Earth from our fathers, we are borrowing it from our children.” The water, soil, minerals, forests, and wildlife of our county need to be understood and the quality protected for future generations.”
INTRODUCTION
Covering 564 square miles and 22 townships Coshocton County is located in the east-central unglaciated portion of Eastern Ohio. With a mean elevation of 1,100 to 1,200 feet above sea level, Holmes, Tuscarawas, Guernsey, Muskingum, Licking, and Knox counties border the county. Created in 1810 from Muskingum County, the word Coshocton is a derivative of an Indian word meaning, "union of waters". The quality of life in Coshocton County continues to be closely related to the quality of our native environment. The proper use and management of our air, land, and water resources are necessary to maintain our physical, social, and economic well being. Our relationships to the use of these physical elements comprise the key land use issues of environmental quality.
In considering future land use possibilities and alternatives, affect on the physical environment and utilization of natural resources is of significant importance. Much of Coshocton’s social and economic development has been and continues to be determined by its natural resources. The effects of natural processes and human activities--floods, water pollution, mining, and urbanization--on the natural resources are important to understand because these processes and activities, to a large degree, affect the health, safety, and well-being of the citizens, the economy, and the environment of the county.
Effective management of environmental resources requires current and accurate information that can be used to evaluate and recognize possible land use changes affecting the local ecosystems. High quality information is necessary to identify and respond to these trends. Today, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are being used to ensure that rational and ecologically sound decisions are made concerning resource development, impact mitigation, environmental monitoring and other environmental management issues pertaining to land use management. GIS can evaluate land and resource use alternatives while considering potential environmental and cultural resource impacts, economic implications, and potential use conflicts.
Coshocton County Ground-Water Resources: (See map )
Of the many natural resources available, water has always been crucial to Coshocton County’s growth and economic status dating back to our historical beginnings in the early 1800’s. Groundwater is water naturally stored below ground surface, in broken rock, gravel, or other permeable material. Coshocton County is comprised of parts of several geologic formations. The aquifers in these formations yield various quantities of water, and recharge at different rates. Many types of land uses depend on groundwater, including agriculture and industry, the city of Coshocton, villages of West Lafayette, Warsaw, and individual residences.
Three main aquifers provide ground water for Coshocton County. The unconsolidated coarse-grained sand and gravel aquifer is the most productive, and is located in the river valleys that cut through the center of the county from east to west and from northwest to southeast. Yields of 100 to 1000 gallons per minute (gpm) or more are obtainable from the thick permeable deposits of sand and gravel beneath the flood plains adjacent to the Muskingum River, and are also located in a portion of Wakatomika Creek. The ancient drainage channel beneath the Muskingum River from Coshocton to Dresden is filled with as much as 135 feet of coarse deposits of sand, gravel, boulders, and thin layers of clay. Proven yields of as much as 1500 gpm have been developed in the vicinity of Conesville. In the southeastern portion of the county, including the Plainfield area, yields up to 100 gpm are possible from valley fill material containing sand and gravel deposits. Scattered throughout the county, the sandstone, shale, and limestone aquifers offer limited yields that range from 25gpm to less than 3 gpm. Specific information on ground-water availability and wells can be obtained by contacting ODNR Division of Water.
Runoff and sediment from residential development, construction sites, and agricultural lands may enter the county's streams and lakes. Also, runoff may carry other pollutants, such as lawn and agricultural chemicals (pesticides and fertilizers), effluent from septic systems, oil and gas from spills, and industrial wastes.
Ground water is a major water source for rural households in Coshocton County. Approximately 47 percent of all households obtain their water from private wells and developed springs. Based on an estimated usage of 75 gallons per person per day, 1,260,525 gpd from private wells and developed springs are used. Other private water uses include industry (95 million gpd) and livestock use (0.39 million gpd), which are mostly from ground-water supplies. In addition, the Muskingum River provides approximately 260 million gpd of surface water for thermoelectric-power cooling purposes at the Columbus Southern Power Generating Plant in Conesville. The remaining 53 percent of households use public-water supplies that use ground water as the source.
.
Water Use in Coshocton County, Ohio.1
Public Water System Population Served Primary Water Source Water Usage (GPD)2 Treatment Plant Capacity (GPD)
Coshocton 14,538 Ground Water 6,810,000 8,100,000
Echoing Hills 86 Surface Water 10,300 23,000
Millers HOA3 100 Ground Water 5,000 60,000
Warsaw 713 Ground Water 80,000 218,000
West Lafayette 2,613 Ground Water 225,000 1,080,000
Other 4 570 Ground Water 39,600 N/A
1 Estimates from Ohio EPA.
2 GPD = gallons per day.
3 Millers Home Owners Association.
4 Includes mobile home parks, nursing homes, housing developments, and religious institutions; total treatment plant capacity figure not available.
(Informational source: Coshocton County Ground-Water Resources. P. D. Golden, K. T. Ricker, L. C. Brown. AEX-480.16. Ohio State University Extension)
Five Watersheds impacting Coshocton County
o 05040001 Tuscarawas
o 05040002 Mohican
o 05040003 Walhonding
o 05040004 Muskingum
o 05040005 Wills Creek
GOAL 1: To efficiently utilize the water resources of and for Coshocton County while maintaining good quality water for public water supplies, propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for domestic, agricultural, industrial, commercial, municipal, recreation and other beneficial uses.
Strategies
1. The county should consider the physical capacity of the land and water to accommodate land uses when planning for the location, type and density of rural development.
2. Maintain rural densities of 1 to 3 acres per dwelling in rural residential areas to minimize potential groundwater pollution from septic tank use. Even lower densities should be required when soil limitations show more than the usual limitations for septic tank systems or approved alternative on site sewage systems.
3. In areas experiencing proven water pollution from septic tanks or inadequate water supply, encourage the provision of alternative individual treatment system or water systems to overcome health hazards or to provide a greater margin of public safety in allowable developments.
4. Minimize soil erosion and sedimentation by encouraging soil conservation techniques. Educational programs and technical assistance should be provided in voluntary erosion abatement.
5. The County Health Department should sustain sanitary surveys in areas of concentrated rural development to determine present or potential septic tank pollution problems.
6. Residential, commercial and industrial development should be encouraged to be designed or located in a manner to maintain an acceptable impact on water quality.
7. Coshocton County should continue to support watershed management practices that protect and enhance water quality and quantity.
8. Water resources used as municipal water supplies should be protected by encouraging the strict enforcement by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency and Ohio Department of Health Standards.
9. Small watersheds that are current or potential water sources for municipalities shall be identified, and coordination requirements defined, in intergovernmental agreements if the city or villages determines that special protective measures are needed for the watershed. When municipalities have identified particular needs and methods for protecting their watersheds, the county shall consider including such measures within the Coshocton County Comprehensive Plan.
10. Encourage water quality testing of rural residential wells through a public information program.
11. Improve maintenance and use of residential and industrial
septic systems by:
a. encouraging proper operation and maintenance of septic systems.
b. encouraging water conservation to reduce waste loading,
c. educating users about detrimental chemical additives, particularly those containing chlorinated organic solvents, that are sold to improve septic system and drain field operation.
12. Coshocton County should recognize the risk to maintenance of good quality groundwater from improperly abandoned wells and encourages proper abandonment of unused wells.
13. Participate in cooperative water quality planning through such agencies as the Ohio EPA and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Army Corps of Engineers, Ohio State University Extension, and U.S. Geologic Survey.
14. Encourage water providers to share delivery systems and supply sources within populated growth boundaries.
15. Encourage construction of wells for municipal water use only within populated growth boundaries to minimize impacts of wellhead protection areas on other land uses.
GOAL 2: To ensure all standards and regulations applicable to waters in Coshocton County are coordinated.
Strategies
1. Coshocton County should coordinate with state and federal agencies to help ensure the waters of the county comply with applicable state and federal water quality standards.
2. Coshocton County should, to the extent financially and practically possible, support water quality or quality management plans and programs of federal, state and regional agencies.
3. In supporting good decisions about land use, the County should encourage conservation of water resources, improved treatment of point sources of pollution and the control of non-point sources of pollution.
4. Encourage Ohio EPA to expand their monitoring program and increase sample areas to determine locations approaching or exceeding drinking water standards. Impacts from domestic sewage shortfalls should be assessed to identify any possible hazards.
5. Coshocton County should cooperate with municipal and other public water service providers in development and implementation of wellhead protection programs consistent with Ohio EPA state water quality and land-use requirements.
6. The Strategies of this Comprehensive Plan should provide a framework to protect the groundwater resources of these and other aquifers from unsustainable levels of use.
GOAL 3: To strive for an adequate quantity of water for beneficial uses within the County.
Strategies
1. Evaluation of demand for water should include, but not be limited to, the following potential beneficial uses in no particular order: domestic, municipal, agriculture, stream flow augmentation, industrial, commercial, livestock, mining, and recreation.
2. Identify and designate areas of the county that lack sufficient water as “Groundwater Limited Areas”.
GOAL 4: To educate property owners about the importance of the use of their property to water quality and quantity.
Strategies
1. The Coshocton County Regional Planning Commission may develop and maintain a source of information regarding water conservation, water quality protection, and water laws for public use.
2. Coshocton County Regional Planning Commission should refer land use applicants to sources of information regarding water conservation, water quality protection, and water rights early in the development review process.
3. Encourage individual water conservation practices to hold water
demands to a minimum through a public information program.
4. Help ensure that adequate information is submitted by developers seeking new groundwater rights to determine whether the proposed consumption will exceed the sustainable yield of the aquifer or interfere with other wells in the area.
Mineral Resources
Mineral production in Coshocton County has played key roles in the current infrastructure development and maintenance and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan recognizes the importance of mineral and aggregate resources. Because of their limited availability, mineral and aggregate resources require an through understanding of necessary considerations because of their importance to a healthy and growing economy. Therefore, the land use planning process needs to further investigate the relationships among the geologic, economic, and environment-related characteristics of mineral commodities and deposit types. In addition, land use management considerations will require increasing needs for better geologic and minerals data on industrial minerals, especially in areas adjacent to growing population centers and prime agriculture farm land. A through investigation and discussion of the mineral and rock resources in Coshocton County should be considered in the future to determine what resources remain as viable contributors to the local economy.
Information from the Ohio Department of Natural Resources Geosurvey and interactive map for Coshocton
County lists the following minerals removed from mines and quarries annually:
Coal 33,959 ton.
The Ohio Coal Association listed 2001 production at 54,530 short ton.
Sand, gravel, and sandstone 32,137 ton
Sand and gravel 402,408 ton
Sandstone and Conglomerate 30,723 ton
In 2002 the Ohio Division of Mineral Resources Management reported that the volatility of the oil and gas cycles in part, contributed to the lowest number of wells being drilled since at least 1988. There has been a decline in oil and gas production for the past 10 years. As the 7th ranked county in wells drilled, Coshocton County has followed the trend.
The long-term effort of data collection and interpretation provides natural-resources managers and policymakers with essential earth-science information needed to make future land use decisions about Coshocton County resources and mitigation of environmental problems.
GOAL 5: To plan for and protect mineral and aggregate resources for future use.
Strategies
Coshocton County Should:
1. Consideration applications for new or expanded resource sites in accordance with state regulatory policies and guidelines in a proactive manner.
2. Conduct periodic resource use and inventory reviews.
Forests/Woodlands
Coshocton County has 177,057 acres of woodland. According to the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, in 1991 there was 2.05 times more growth than removals of growing stock and 1.90 times more saw timber growth than removals. Forest/woodlands are significant to the economic, recreational and environmental character of Coshocton County. These forest and woodlands provide the direct resource base for the forest industry and an indirect base for related industries. A majority of the water resources of the County originate in the forested areas of the County and are primary watershed areas. These forests also serve a multitude of functions that include abundant wildlife habitat and areas that are widely used for outdoor recreation. The unique scenic and environmental qualities of forest lands make them attractive for recreational activities such as camping, hiking, fishing, hunting, water sports, etc. These activities, in addition to providing an important social benefit, can also contribute significantly to the economy of Coshocton County.
Woodland also provides an abundance of fish and wildlife habitat. A large number of animals require the cover, food supply, and protection provided by the timber and other vegetation for their continued existence.
Agriculture and timber production are similar and compatible land uses. The long-term growth aspect of timber production makes it different from other agricultural production. However, both programs need similar protection from non-compatible activities to insure that forestry continues to be a viable industry if managed properly by private landowners and public entities.
GOAL 6: Protect and maintain our forest resource.
Strategies
1. Support a woodland protection program in Coshocton County to limit the uses of identified woodlands to timber production, farming, watershed, wildlife habitat, recreation and other compatible uses. Designate appropriate areas for continued forest activities.
2. Develop a timber conservation zone and apply it to those areas best suited to woodland uses.
3. On lands that contain a mixture of agricultural and forest uses a Farm/Timber zone should applied to protect these resources uses from incompatible uses.
4. Forest management and harvesting activities in Coshocton County should be conducted according to the Best Management Practices (BMP’s) for erosion control for logging practices in Ohio, administered by the ODNR, State Forestry Department.
5. Strive to conserve woodlands and mixed farm/timber lands by maintaining a mixed forest and agricultural base and to protect the county’s forest and farm economies by making possible economically efficient woodlot and agricultural practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting of woodland tree species and agricultural products as the leading use on forest land and mixed farm/timber land consistent with sound management of soil, air, water and fish and wildlife resources and to provide for recreational opportunities.
6. Prohibit subdivision development and other land divisions creating new dwelling sites that are not compatible with the protection and efficient management of forestry and woodlands.
Soil
The Soil Survey of Coshocton County contains information that affects land use planning. It contains predictions of soil behavior for selected land uses. It highlights soil limitations, improvements needed to overcome the limitations, and the impact of selected land uses, on the environment. The Soil and Water Conservation District, the County Health Department, and some developers are using this recent publication as a guide for development. Recommend the County be proactive and encourage the continued use of the Soil Survey for Coshocton County and that sufficient resources be allocated to enhance the GIS format so that it becomes a web based format for easier and more frequent use by the public.
FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
The Woodbury Wildlife Area contains 20,000 acres, Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District at Mohawk Dam and Wills Creek have 3,730 acres, and Coshocton Park District contains 450 acres. This large wildlife habitat area has resulted in a large population of deer, raccoon, turkey, geese, and other species. The streams, rivers, lakes, and ponds are home to aquatic wildlife. The discussion of fish and wildlife habitat issues emphasizes that fish and wildlife are directly dependent on the quality of the natural environment. With awareness of the environmental needs of fish and wildlife, care can be exercised in reviewing lot splits and developments in rural areas of Coshocton County which will remain in agriculture and forestry uses, thereby achieving most of the protection needs of this habitat.
The Coshocton County goals and Strategies in regard to protecting fish and wildlife habitat are:
GOAL 7: Protect fish and wildlife habitat, maintain optimal ecological balance and protect endangered species.
Strategies
1. New roads requiring County approval shall be located to avoid identified habitat areas whenever possible. Bridges, roads and access rights-of-way should be designed to avoid restriction of channel capacity and minimize removal of shoreline vegetation.
2. Developments should retain vegetation along streams, lakes, reservoirs, and fencerows to provide for shelter, shade, food and nesting.
3. To maintain stream quality and protect sensitive waterfowl areas, land uses that require drainage, excessive removal of riparian vegetation, alteration of stream banks and filling shall be discouraged in these locations.
4. Conflicts with wildlife shall be considered in land development. Development adjacent to streams, sensitive waterfowl areas and critical wildlife areas shall incorporate adequate setbacks and buffer zones.
5. Development density shall be controlled so that significant wildlife habitat will not be adversely affected.
6. Coshocton County will cooperate with local, state and federal agencies to identify, conserve and protect fish and wildlife habitat and in implementation measures for the protection of such areas.
7. Native plant species, wetlands and stream bank vegetation on managed public lands should be protected.
NOISE IMPACTS
Exposure to excessive noise levels over prolonged periods can be a threat to health. Noise pollution is not a pervasive problem in rural Coshocton County but excessive noise from certain industries, from highly traveled roads or the airport could reduce the livability of nearby dwellings. Attempts to achieve control over excessive noise by controlling the sources should be considered in the future. Despite controls residences close to a heavily traveled road could be adversely affected. For example, 50 feet from a dwelling the sound level of a single new accelerating automobile is about 80 decibels.
How often loud noises occur is a factor in how it affects people. During the daytime it is common to experience numerous loud noises for short periods. These same noises, if they occur at night, would not only waken someone but, if frequently enough, would prevent them from getting back to sleep. Noises above 55 decibels will disturb normal conversation and are considered potentially harmful. Between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. sounds above 45 decibels inside a dwelling disturb sleep.
Outside noise measured inside a building is 10 decibels lower with the windows open and 20 decibels lower with the windows closed. New dwellings located in close proximity to the noise source can be adversely affected. It may be necessary for the County to consider noise impacts when approving development near certain sources of noise.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Solid Waste management involves collection and disposal of various solid waste materials such as household, commercial, and industrial garbage. There is currently one public Ohio Environmental Protection Agency licensed landfill in Coshocton County where private and commercial haulers deposit solid waste. Because of the landfill method of disposing of solid waste, potential concerns for land and water quality exists.
The goal of the solid waste program is to meet the needs for safe, efficient, and sanitary storage, collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste, and to increase, to the maximum, salvage reclamation and reuse of materials from solid waste. The various disposal alternatives will need to be evaluated and a new disposal facility developed by the time the current landfill reaches capacity in the future.
Siting solid waste disposal facilities is a significant land use issue. Land use compatibility and environmental, and economic impacts as well as public acceptance must be considered. Specific OEPA site criteria for any new facility should be clearly understood and become of the County’s Land Use Plan.
SEWAGE SLUDGE DISPOSAL
The by-product of treating wastewater or sewage is accumulation of organic solids. When sewage is processed in a treatment facility, the process involves removal of waste solids from the sewage water. The purified water is returned to rivers and the solids or sludge remains. The disposal of sludge is usually accomplished by either taking it to a landfill or by spreading it on agricultural lands as an organic fertilizer and soil conditioner. The use of sludge can be beneficial to agricultural land, making it more productive. It contains significant quantities of nitrogen and phosphorus plus the humus material that can improve the quality of farmland.
The use of sludge as an agricultural fertilizer has its limitations since its over-application can be a threat to land and water quality. Improper use can result in harmful accumulations of nitrogen and heavy metals. Because of these problems, each application site of sludge is reviewed and approved by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA). The main concerns involve disposal of the sewage sludge in an environmentally safe way.
There presently are three generators of sludge in Coshocton County that produce sludge that must be disposed of. Currently, only the City of Coshocton produces sufficient quantities of sludge to present a disposal problem. However, the needs of Warsaw and West Lafayette must also be understood. In addition, municipalities from neighboring counties may utilize land in Coshocton County as OEPA approved application sites.
Coshocton County recognizes the potential beneficial aspect of agricultural application of limited amounts of sewage sludge. However, disposal of unlimited quantities of sewage sludge becomes a disposal problem of a different level. The dumping of large quantities of sludge in one location would create potential land use, health, productivity and water quality problems.
The County Strategies relating to sewage sludge application to land should encompass the following:
1. Encourage the beneficial agricultural application of sewage sludge in limited amounts according to OEPA standards.
2. Require monitoring of sludge disposal sites for possible problems.
AIR QUALITY PLANNING
Air quality is monitored through the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) and standards are enforced on a regional basis. The Logan OEPA Regional office has jurisdiction over Coshocton County. It should be the policy of Coshocton County to understand the applicable state and federal air quality standards.
Probably the most pronounced problem with air quality in Coshocton County occurs during periods of atmospheric stagnation, warm can trap pollution at low elevations. These weather conditions therefore magnify air pollution conditions. Odors tend to concentrate in areas of higher population density causing discomfort and complaints. This pollution would normally disperse at higher elevations or be vented out of the area by the wind. Because of the air pollution potential, Coshocton County land use development strategies must consider potential affects upon air quality and should be developed to minimize pollution problems. However, the potential for conflict between the interests of maintaining air quality standards and the important economic development and agricultural practices must be recognized.
Summary
While the present and future availability and safety of water is good for Coshocton County, we must protect our rivers and future reservoir sites for water supplies. We must prevent septic tank effluent, agriculture, industry, and mining from polluting our streams and soils. This was the goal in 1970 and is still necessary in 2004. In order to insure a continued supply of water to this variety of uses, Coshocton County will continue to need reliable and current information regarding groundwater resources. Sources of this information are not always abundant, but the county needs to obtain or generate sufficient data on which to base land use decisions that affect, or are affected by, groundwater supply in order to avert overdraft and land use conflicts.
The water resources portion of this plan provides a discussion of the possible issues facing Coshocton County with regards to water supply, use, and quality. However, a further in depth review and analysis will provide clearer goals and for county decision-makers to employ when faced with matters relating to these issues. A separate Water Management Plan should be developed and adopted as part of the county comprehensive land use plan for reference. The goals then should be part of the overall guidance for county land use decisions developed from the information presented in the Water Management Plan and should be utilized in all future land use decisions. The demand for consumptive use of water has and will continue to increase. At the same time, increasing use of the resource by recreation and the need to maintain or enhance fish habitat argues for consumption issues. The increased human activity in the county heightens the risk that the resource will be polluted.
Jobs have been lost with less coal mining and drilling for gas and oil. Mining and drilling are better regulated resulting in less pollution. Orphan (abandoned) wells remain that need to be plugged.
• Former surface mined land has been reclaimed as a wildlife area.
• Deer, raccoon, turkey, and other wild animals have become numerous enough to become nuisances. They eat farmers’ crops, kill sheep, and cause accidents on the highways. The county must work with the Division of Wildlife to encourage hunters to take more doe. ODNR should not introduce wildlife into the area that create a hazard to livestock.
• Coshocton County currently has an adequate and safe water supply.
• There are 11 Coshocton County sites listed in the Master Sites List (MSL) where there is evidence of, or it is suspected that waste management has resulted in the contamination of air, water, or soil and there is a confirmed or potential threat to human health or the environment. Eight are situated in the city of Coshocton, 2 in West Lafayette, and 1 in Monroe Township. Planning groups need to secure funding to clean up these sites.
• The selling of rural land parcels in small tracts not large enough for sustainable agriculture production is a threat to the agriculture economics of the county.
• Unincorporated areas have been experiencing more new single-family home construction than the urban areas of Coshocton County. This trend not only impacts the rural character of the county, but also impacts the cost to provide government services to county residents. Inspection and continued regulation of water supplies and septic systems are needed to protect the environment.
• Ecologically and scientifically significant Natural Areas contain components that are unique to that area and location and cannot be relocated. The objective of the County should be to preserve and protect sections of these ecologically diverse components before they are forever lost or altered. When land use changes are proposed in the vicinity of identified natural areas, possible conflicts shall be identified and evaluated as to their social, economic, environmental and energy consequences. Significant conflicts shall be resolved. As new natural areas are proposed they will be reviewed and if determined to be ecologically and scientifically significant should be protected.
Back to Top
Law Enforcement & Safety Services Sub-Committee (Updated January 2005)
Committee Chair: Ray Worthington
Commitee Members: Mike Perkins, William Arnold, Tim Rogers, Ron Lusk, Darren Walker, Gilbert Parkhill, Brian Stitler, Ty Stewart, Chet Beard, Scott Mast, Trent Parkhill, Travis Goodwill, Stan Braxton, Andy Dobson, Ernie Snyder, Ken Pepper, Mike Layton, Don Lusk, Don Carpenter, and Donna Carpenter
“Identify
the resources and actions required to provide public safety services
to meet the ever-changing needs of Coshocton County."
to meet the ever-changing needs of Coshocton County."
The agencies and departments that serve Coshocton County have an interesting and diverse history as they have developed over the past one hundred ninety two years. The following introduction will briefly trace the beginning and growth as they evolved to today’s services.
Refer to attached map for location of the service and the area covered. An “in depth” study of Coshocton County Law Enforcement & Safety Services is available in Law Enforcement & Safety Services – Sub Committee of the “2003 Coshocton County Strategic Land Use Planning Committee”
Law Enforcement
Office of County Sheriff began in 1811, with 38 Sheriffs to date. Three jails have existed prior to current Justice Center. Current jail is rated for housing 27 inmates but averages 67 daily and has exceeded 78 inmates. A staff of 67 employees with 38 additional Special & Auxiliary Deputies (16 mounted officers) complete the staffing level of the Sheriff’s office. The communications center dispatches all law enforcement, fire & emergency medical services within the county along with neighboring county emergency services. The City of Coshocton contracts with the Sheriff’s Department for Law Enforcement and is charged with all Law Enforcement in the county & city, except for the village of West Lafayette. West Lafayette has a staff of 16 providing police protection for that village.
History of Coshocton County EMS
Early ambulance service was provided by local funeral homes. This was mainly due to the fact that they were the only ones that had the communication equipment and staff to provide it.
Mid 1970’s
Idea was discussed to form a “volunteer service”. This was mainly due to impending state and federal legislation and new requirements for ambulance services. Warsaw is credited with forming the 1st ambulance service based outside the funeral home. The Warsaw squad officially began service on February 3, 1973. The squad was staffed by an all volunteer force.
Mid 1970’s
The village of West Lafayette, Keene and the City of Coshocton follow Warsaw’s initiative and form ambulance services in their respective areas.
February 1976
Coshocton County Commissioners assume control of all ambulances services. This was mainly due to additional state and federal legislation. In addition, the Commissioners had a better ability to secure state and federal funding. The squads remained staffed by an all volunteer force.
June 1, 1986
The Keene station closes due to funding and a lack of 911 calls in that area.
1989
Advanced Life Support is implemented in to the system. This provides an increased level of care to the community through enhanced equipment and training.
1995
First part-paid personnel are hired to supplement the volunteer force. Changes in society, along with in increase in call volume, limit the amount of time volunteers can contribute to the system. Part-time, and eventually full-time personnel, are added throughout the next few years.
July 1999
County Commissioners ask Medflight to assume responsibility of the County EMS service. County Commissioners were responsible for EMS for 23 years before turning operations over to Medflight. The Commissioners asked for assistance due to numerous changes in state and federal legislation, changes in the EMS industry as a whole, and dramatic changes in insurance reimbursement stemming from The 1997 Balanced Budget Act.
November 2003
Medflight continues to operate the EMS service. Today, CCEMS is staffed with a combination of part-time and full-time partners at each base. CCEMS continues to operate out of three bases, which are located Coshocton, West Lafayette and Warsaw. A 3.0 mill operating levy passed in November of 2003 enables enhancements in staffing and equipment for the service, which provides the community with a better care.
All reports are driven by the history & origins of each organization
Coshocton County Haz-Mat Team
First Haz-Mat Team formed & organized 1991/1992 – Mac Richcreek First team leader
First vehicle a used EMS squad was complimented with a donated trailer by Wiley Organics in 1994
Scott Matchett & Ken Posey team leaders in 1996/1997
Larry Wilkin team leader 1997/2002
Team reorganized in 2002 & additional training provided 21 members trained to Technician Level
18 Career firemen & 3 Volunteer Firemen under team leadership of Rick Mills
Bakersville Volunteer Fire Department - Company #1
Several tragedies in Adams Township determines a need for fire protection at Bakersville
Two stores in Bakersville were destroyed by fire in 1923.
Bakersville School was struck by lightning & burned in 1938. The West Lafayette Fire chief died of heart attack during that incident.
Bakersville feed mill burned in 1943.
A home in Bakersville burned for a total loss in 1959 despite efforts of Baltic & West Lafayette Firefighters.
The Independent Bakersville Volunteer Fire Department was formed with the fire station sitting on the site of the house lost in 1959.
First fire truck was a converted gas truck & a portable pump.
First new truck in 1970, First new Van/Rescue in 1974, First new engine in 1984
Fire protection in this rural setting is complicated with 3 phone exchanges, 3 school districts, 2 area codes, 4 zip codes & mutual aid with Fire Departments in 2 counties.
Strong support from community maintains the department of 20/22 volunteers that have trained members as first responders. Financial support includes fundraisers, township contract & levy.
One chief with 40 years still serves.
F.C.V. Volunteer Fire Department-Conesville – Company #2
Conesville Village Council determines a need for fire protection in the 1950’s
Franklin & Virginia Township join the effort to support a department and the F.C.V. (Franklin-Conesville-Virginia) Volunteer Fire Department is formed in 1955.
Harold & Hilda Thomas donate location to build present station.
First apparatus purchased in 1956 for $12,500
Original membership of 20-25 volunteers charge members .25 cents per month for fuel & supplies to operate equipment.
Ladies Auxiliary was formed in 1956 and continues as a supporting force.
Several station additions are included in the seven bays, station support area & two outlying buildings. Equipment includes 2 engines, 1 tanker, 1 rescue vehicle, 2 brush trucks & 2 boats w/motors.
23 Volunteers are paid $2.50 p/hour for training & drills. They are covered with Workman’s Compensation & secondary insurance for line of duty incidents. Calls are unpaid volunteer service.
Three Chiefs have served to date.
City of Coshocton, Fire Department-Full time, Paid, Professional – Company #3
Formed in January 1906 with two stations. One on Main Street & one on Walnut Street to provide protection on either side of the Pennsylvania Railroad tracks while the crossings were blocked by train traffic. Early equipment was horse & hand drawn.
The first motor driven apparatus was purchased July 25, 1916 for $5450.00.
Captain Wilmer Hale was killed in the line of duty December 16, 1975
City of Coshocton renamed Walnut Street Station “Hale Station” in honor of Captain Hale
The Main Street Station closed in 1982 and Department consolidated into the Walnut Station.
City builds a new station on 7th Street in 1989 with the name “Hale Station” coming with the department.
Today’s Hale Station houses 4 engines, a 100” aerial, a utility pick-up, 2 administration cars, a Haz-Mat trailer, and a boat w/motor, as well as living quarters for the 18 member department.
Seven Fire Chiefs have served to date.
Three Rivers Volunteer Fire District – Company #4
Formally - Tuscarawas Township Volunteer Fire Department
North Side in Canal Lewisville & South Side in Pleasant Valley – Company #4 & #5
Fire claims lives of 2 children in a home fire in early 1950’s
First fire levy failed to pass in 1950/51
Fire levy passed in November 1952
Fire department founded on January 7, 1953
Two companies were eventually formed- North Sid – Company #4 & South Side-Company #5
First vehicle was a donated used gas truck-Cleaned & converted
Fundraises & donations provided much initial equipment
Both stations benefit from Ladies Auxiliary & wives of firefighters
First two new vehicles ordered - One for North Side & one for South Side 1953/54
North Side station began as a 2 story school house-Building converted in mid 1950’s
South Side Station built with levy funds of 1954/55 and volunteer labor.
Manned by 40 unpaid firefighters or 20 at each station house.
Three Rivers Fire District formed October 1, 2003 including Tuscarawas, Keene & Millcreek Townships
West Lafayette Volunteer Fire Department – Company #6
Village council purchases first fire equipment in 1898. The hand pumper, hose reel & ladder wagon was operated by the council, marshal & mayor. The pumper still in possession of the department was refinished in 1970 and still “works”.
The first fire department was organized after village mayor appoints first chief in 1930.
Moore Enameling donates modern electric fire siren 1931- It is still in use
The first new fire engine purchased in 1931
A Deluge pumper was donated to department by Moore Enameling in 1945.
A fireman’s association is formed in 1954
A boat w/motor & trailer was added in 1960 and a van used as rescue truck in 1961.
Fire department headquartered in building on South Kirk Street until municipal building & fire station were completed on Railroad Street.
The present firehouse was built (4 bays) through efforts of council, firemen, & civic groups 1962
A ladies auxiliary “The Sparkettes” was formed to support fundraising
20/25 Volunteers receive “clothing gratuity” for each run. (Currently they are forgoing payment to pay for a truck)
Six Chief Officers have served to date
Walhonding Valley Volunteer Fire District-Warsaw – Company #7
Formally Warsaw Volunteer Fire Department
Warsaw forms first volunteer fire department in 1925. A two wheeled chemical (soda acid) fire extinguisher cart purchased in September 1925 was drawn to the fire by local business’s or individual’s truck. Refills came via a bucket brigade.
Fire station constructed with a siren on the roof in May 1943.
Formal organization of Warsaw Volunteer Firemen takes place in 1947.
The first factory built fire truck (1931 model) was purchased from West Lafayette in 1955.
The department was certified & reorganized in 1957
The first new fire truck was purchased & delivered in May 1958 via bond issues.
Warsaw Volunteer Emergency Squad began with many firefighters assuming additional responsibility to form & staff this service.
Contracts signed to provide fire protection to townships of Bedford, Bethlehem, Jefferson, Monroe, New Castle, Perry, Tiverton & the Village of Nellie.
Walhonding Valley Fire District formed in 1987 covering 228 square miles.
New station constructed in 1996 houses 2 engines, 2 tankers, 2 grass trucks, 1 mini pumper, 1 rescue, 1 dive trailer, 1 ATV, 1 boat w/motor.
35 volunteers are paid for training & runs. Department provides 2 paid firefighters, 12 hours per day 6 days a week.
Seven Chief Officers have served to date.
Outside agencies providing services to Coshocton County
Baltic, Dresden & Frazeysburg Volunteer Fire Departments serve Crawford, Perry & Washington Townships
Swiss Valley and Newcomerstown E.M.S. serve Crawford & Adams Townships.
Major needs for Coshocton County Safety Services: Goals (no specific order)
1) County wide water system
2) New jail
3) New fire stations &/or upgrade old buildings
4) County wide radio communications system
5) Adequate training
6) Manpower
County wide water system
Because of population density, terrain, State Wildlife property and large tracts of previously strip mined areas; it is not a realistic goal that the county be covered 100% with a water system.
Refer Water & Sewer report: We agree that population centers, industrial & commercial areas shall be well served with systems that incorporate existing capabilities of Coshocton, West Lafayette & Warsaw. These systems should extend their coverage or join a water district to fill in the gaps between the three systems & extend near population centers not presently served.
New water systems, storage tanks should take into consideration the need of adequate capacity to handle fire flows for hydrants, sprinkler system needs and growth in area served.
A strong argument in the water system funding issue is money saved on insurance coverage.
New County Jail
The question is not, if we have a new jail but when & where. The need is here and now.
When funding becomes available the location shall be where the site can be protected from fire, weather, and civil unrest without presenting a threat to the general population. Safe access for the EMS serving the inmates shall be a consideration. The building shall be served by a water system that will support sprinkler protection. The facility shall have a communications system that will interface with all county, state & federal emergency systems. Locations that could be considered include old National Guard Armory, the old property known as the former County Home or remote locations in the Airport area. The size should be addressed by a special committee with the expertise in this field. All issues will require funding that is beyond the scope of this committee.
New fire stations &/or upgrade old buildings
As of this report several building are original firehouses and are approaching 50 years old.
Some buildings are old structures that were not intended to house fire equipment and will require replacement in the future. Location of stations operated by volunteer responders is a major consideration. Presently the SR 16/US 36 corridor has 7 state highway accesses & 47 township & county road accesses. Future highway construction & moves to limit access to the corridor may have a negative impact on responders getting to the station & emergency equipment getting to the incident location.
New structures should allow for expansion, have drive through bays & accommodate larger equipment as it evolves. Volunteer stations should be served by sprinkler protection & alarm systems if the building is not constantly occupied. Opportunities to share space with parks, recreation areas, or highly protected risk properties should be considered.
Refer Tourism: Activities such as moto-cross (extreme-sports), water recreation activities and expansion of horseback riding trails will have an impact on equipment & training required to respond to emergencies.
Refer Transportation: Roadways, driveways, bridges, culverts either new or upgrading old shall be able to accommodate emergency equipment safely. Existing roadways shall be free of obstructions, such as limbs, structures, poles, wires & etc.
Since the completion of this report another Volunteer Fire Department has gone into service.
November 1, 2004 the Jackson Township Volunteer Fire Department began answering calls.
Staffed by 20 firemen, two Engines, one tanker, & one brush truck make up the new Fire Department in a new building on SR 541 W about ½ mile west of the Coshocton City Corporation line.
County wide radio communications system
The terrain in Coshocton County prevents 100% emergency radio coverage for the area. The location of radio towers is a prime concern for effective communications. The non-emergency communications towers & sites on private owned property could be utilized without redundant towers and should be considered. Benefits of emergency services ability to communicate among each other as well as with neighboring counties are important considerations.
Communications have, are & will be a major concern for Law Enforcement & Safety Services. Even initiatives underway will not permit cross-communications between the various agencies. It must continually be addressed.
Adequate training
All emergency services would benefit from qualified instruction being available within the county. In the case of the volunteer services the candidate is working a full time job or is a full time parent. Versatile training schedules are a key issue in attracting volunteers. Our county has the Joint Vocational School & the Coshocton Education Center as resources for this vital issue. High School class offerings could include: Introduction to EMS, Law Enforcement or Firefighting and be credited as part of basic training. Continuing education is offered in selected emergency fields.” In house” training is appealing to part time employees or volunteers.
Manpower
The apparent trend of Coshocton County becoming a bedroom community and/or a retirement community will increase demands on all emergency services. There will be a greater need for services provided by the emergency agencies. There is concern for the manpower available to operate the emergency services of the county.
Back to Top
Parks & Open Spaces Sub-Committee (Updated November 2004)
Committee Chair: Ann Miller
Committee members: Ann Miller, Chair, Neil Caldwell, Michelle Darner, Bill Edwards, Alice Hoover, Bob Johnson, Tom Meiser, Steve Miller, Ed Myers, Brad Perkins and Les Reid.
Introduction and Historical Background:
Parks and open spaces provide the opportunity for active recreational pursuits and also for more passive pursuits such as nature study. They provide a place for sport-oriented activities such as golf, swimming, tennis, soccer, etc. and also a place for non-sport activities such as picnicking, bird-watching, camping, etc. In addition to the personal benefit that residents receive from parks and open spaces, the County benefits in two other important ways. The first is an environmental benefit. Land used for parks and open spaces helps assure the land will be preserved for a long time which will then enhance air quality and protect wildlife and plants. The second benefit is economic in nature. The development of parks and open spaces is attractive to tourists, it may increase property values, and businesses may be more interested in a community with a viable park system.
The first land use Plan for Coshocton County was written in 1970. That plan recommended that community parks use the existing resources and be located at or near elementary schools. The plan projected a large population growth and suggested that emphasis should be placed on the development of community parks. It has been over thirty years since that first plan was drafted. The county has changed in many ways, some of which were foreseen in the 1970 plan and some that were not foreseen. One of the most significant things that was predicted, but did not happen, was population growth.
The fact that the population figure remained relatively stable impacts the recommendations of the first plan. According to the Ohio State University Data Center, population growth for Coshocton County through 2015 is predicted to remain flat at about 35, 400. This plan will be based on this prediction and will concentrate on sustaining and improving existing resources.
Historically, recreational areas were important to the people of Coshocton County. The largest park in the County, Lake Park was opened by private individuals, Dick and Helen Johns, in 1923. It was owned by a succession of private citizens until 1959 when the State Legislature passed a bill conveying the lake, Roscoe, and Mudport Basins to the city of Coshocton. Then in 1985 the Coshocton County Park District was formed as a governmental agency. Three Commissioners were appointed and Park Director was hired. The Park District is approximately 90% self-funded. In November of 2002 the Park District placed a 9/10 mil levy on the ballot. The levy did not pass. Funding and the maintenance of the facilities continue to be a challenge for the Park staff and the Park Commissioners.
Vision and Goals
The Parks and Recreation Task Force is dedicated to the vision that an adequate number of parks, recreation areas, and natural spaces will be preserved and maintained for future generations of Coshocton County.
To that end these goals have been established:
1. To identify all existing parks, recreation areas, and natural areas within Coshocton County.
2. To recommend the parks, recreation areas, and natural areas that should be maintained and preserved and/or expanded.
3. To suggest areas where new parks, recreation areas, and natural spaces could be established.
4. To advocate that between 6.25 and 10.5* acres of open space per 1000 persons are dedicated to parks, recreation areas. And natural areas.
(*The National Recreation and Park Association per William E. Daehler, Jr., Land Management Administrator Ohio Department of Natural Resources.)
Facilities Analysis
It is evident from the number of parks, ball fields, and other recreational facilities already in place that the people of Coshocton County consider parks and open spaces an important component in their everyday lives. It also holds true historically that recreational areas were important in the County. The largest park in the County, Lake Park was opened by private individuals, Dick and Helen Johns, in 1923. It was owned by a succession of private citizens until 1959 when the State Legislature passed a bill conveying the lake, Roscoe, and Mudport Basins to the city of Coshocton. Then in 1985 the Coshocton County Park District was formed as a governmental agency. Three Commissioners were appointed and Park Director was hired. The Park District is approximately 90% self-funded. In November of 2002 the Park District placed a 9/10 mil levy on the ballot. The levy did not pass. Funding and the maintenance of the facilities continue to be a challenge for the Park staff and the Park Commissioners.
Parks and recreational facilities have been mapped onto a county map and identified as: Points of Interest, Ball Fields, Birding, Camping, Golf, Hiking/Walking Trails, Horseback Riding, Hunting, Ice-Skating, Picnic/Parks, Shooting, Skateboarding, Soccer, Swimming, and Tennis. These points of interest are identified on Map #1. General areas of recreational opportunities are indicated on Map # 2.
The above mentioned activities and facilities are not only important to the residents of the county but they also can be a “draw” for tourists. They should be maintained and developed with the best interests of both groups in mind.
The Coshocton Park District includes Bancroft Park and Lake Park. Lake Park is the largest park in the District and in the County. Centrally located and adjacent to Roscoe Village, it is heavily used by both County residents and tourists. With the addition of the Aquatic Center in 1999, it is the magnet that draws people to the Park. The number of campers staying at the campground has increased significantly due to the new pool. The renovated Lake Park Pavilion can be rented by groups or individuals and is reserved almost every weekend throughout the year. It is one of the few surviving dance pavilions in the State and is of historic significance in addition to being a well-used facility. The Canal Boat is available for trips down the canal April through October. The Park works in conjunction with Roscoe Village booking charter trips and individual reservations. Hilltop Golf Course is managed by the Park District. It is the only government-owned course in the county. The Park also offers numerous picnic shelters, walking and biking paths, hiking trails, an extensive playground, fishing in the canal basins, and ball fields.
Burt Park is situated on six acres in the center of the village of West Lafayette. It was completely restored and rededicated in May of 1998. The park contains a bandstand, picnic shelter, gazebos, tables, and benches. It is frequently used by West Lafayette residents for family picnics and for community functions.
Riverview Park located in the village of Warsaw is a popular site for residents of the Village and surrounding townships. The Park contains three shelters (one with kitchen facilities), a playground, picnic tables, swimming pool, tennis courts, ball fields, walking path, and a basketball court. The Park is truly a community focal point.
There are other smaller parks located throughout the County. These have been identified as: Hall Park in the City of Coshocton, owned by the Coshocton Board of Education; Bancroft Park in the city of Coshocton owned by the Coshocton Park District; South Sixth Street Park and the Otsego complex, both owned by the City of Coshocton; Fresno Park, owned by the Fresno Methodist Church; Bakersville Park, owned by the Bakersville Community Park Board; McElwee Park in New Castle, owned by Community of New Castle; Tiverton Park owned by the Township trustees; and Plainfield Park, owned by the Village of Plainfield. Other picnic areas in the County include Mohawk Dam area, Wills Creek area, the Boy Scout Camp, Sportsman’s Club, Cyclops Lodge, and the Fairgrounds. Each elementary school in the county has a playground that often serves as a neighborhood park for children and their families.
There are numerous ball fields located throughout the County. These are located in the City at the Otsego Ave. complex, the Himebaugh Lot, the Athletic Field (behind Stewart Field), and Cassingham Hollow. The Lake Park fields are comprised of softball fields, a Pony League diamond, and the upper diamond which is a very well-maintained baseball field. There are also fields located in Canal Lewisville, at Union School, River View Park, River View High School, Ridgewood Recreation fields in West Lafayette, Conesville, Fresno, New Castle, Nellie, Roscoe, Keene, and Plainfield.
Biking takes place anywhere there are roads and/or sidewalks to accommodate bike traffic. Specifically bike paths have been constructed at Lake Park, the Otsego complex (which includes a BMX course), paved paths at Riverview and Fresno parks, and the path that connects the city with Lake Park. The hiking trails at Lake Park, and Woodbury Wildlife Area can accommodate mountain biking.
There are four wonderful natural areas for birdwatchers: Woodbury Wildlife Area, Lake Park, Wills Creek, and the nature area on Morgan Run Road.
The county provides a number of opportunities for boating. There is a privately owned canoe livery on the Walhonding River near Lake Park. There is a boat ramp on the Muskingum River within Coshocton city limits. In addition to the Walhonding and the Muskingum Rivers, boaters can access the Kokosing River, the Tuscarawas River, Killbuck Creek, the Mohican River, Wills Creek, and the Lake Park Basins all within Coshocton County.
Camping is a popular activity in the County. The following locations and facilities offer campsites: Lake Park, Lake Lila, Shady Grove, Walhonding Hills, Roscoe Colonial Campground, Forest Hills, Muskingum Valley Scout Reservation, the Sportsman’s Club, Mohawk Dam, Whispering Falls, Tonawanda, Riverfront Campground, and the Fairgrounds (trailer camping only).
Fishing can be enjoyed in all the rivers, streams, ponds, and lakes in the County with permission of private landowners, if needed, and an up-to-date fishing license, if required.
There are five golf courses in the County: Hilltop Golf Course, Hickory Flats, River Greens, Coshocton Country Club, and Millcreek Meadows.
The sport of hiking and walking can obviously take place anywhere but there are a number of designated trails and paths within the County: The Towpath, Scarr Loop Trail, Scarr Forest Trail, and Eagle Ridge Trail, all at Lake Park; Woodbury Wildlife Area, Morgan Run Road nature area, Otsego Complex walking path, Riverview Park walking path, AEP coal lands trails, the Boy Scout Camp, Sportsman’s Club, Fresno Village path, Kids America Indoor track, the Fairgrounds, outdoor tracks at each of the county high schools.
Horseback riding can be enjoyed on the AEP coal land equestrian trail, on the Fairgrounds track, and at privately owned stables within the County.
Coshocton County has long been a destination for hunters. The land is specifically hunted for deer and wild turkey. There are over 20,000 acres of public land available and private lands are also used for this sport as long as permission has been given and a hunting license has been purchased.
There are soccer fields in numerous places throughout the County. Many are located near schools. The two largest soccer complexes are located at Lake Park and at the Otsego Ave. Complex. There are two indoor soccer fields at Kids America.
Two areas specifically designed for skateboarding are at the Otsego Ave. Complex and at Lake Park.
Shooting sports can be enjoyed at the Woodbury Wildlife, Area, the Sportsman’s Club, The Coshocton Gun Club, the Fresno Gun Club, and a one-thousand yard range near Plainfield.
There is one indoor swimming pool at Coshocton high School. Outdoor swimming pools and lakes include Lake Park Aquatic Center, Warsaw Community Pool, the West Lafayette Pool, Forest Hill Lake, Coshocton Town and Country Club Pool, and a pool at the Boy Scout Camp.
There are tennis courts at Coshocton High School, The Coshocton Town and Country Club, Hall Park, Riverview Community Park, Riverview High School; and indoor courts at Kids America and Schelgel’s farm.
Additional commercial recreational facilities and opportunities exist such as the Coshocton Bowling Center, Colonial Sports and Courts Health Fitness Center, and Kids America (an indoor recreation complex).
Action Plan
The National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) has established guidelines to be used in the planning, acquisition, and development of park, recreation, and open space lands, primarily at the community level. They were prepared as minimum rather than maximum guidelines. One standard that has evolved over time from studies of park acreage within metropolitan areas is between 6.25 and ten acres of park and recreation land per one thousand population. By adding the acreage of The Coshocton Park District (approximately 450 acres), Woodbury Wildlife Area (20,000 acres), and the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District in the Wills Creek area (3730 acres) we have already far exceeded the suggested 6.25-10 acres of recreational area per one thousand residents. At issue in Coshocton County is not the attainment of hundreds of additional acres but rather the stewardship of the land that has already been set aside for parks and recreation.
The Woodbury Wildlife Area is owned and under the control of the State of Ohio. The Wills Creek area is under the control of the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District. The County has little jurisdiction over those lands, however, local governments are urged to keep abreast of the care of and plans for these lands. County government and various forms of local government such as township trustees, the Coshocton Park District, village councils, etc. do have jurisdiction over the majority of the local parks, swimming pools, and ball fields. All forms of local government are urged to work together for the betterment of these areas. In the case of the Coshocton County Park District, the County and City governments are encouraged to cooperate to ensure stable funding for the District. This local park district is important to the residents of the County and is very important in attracting both permanent residents and tourists. In the same way it is crucial that Burt Park and Riverview Park receive local funding to remain viable recreation areas within their respective communities.
This portion of the Plan does not recommend that large portions of additional land be set aside for parks and recreation. It does strongly recommend that consideration be given to acquire or promote the following recreational opportunities (Map #3): 1. The Coshocton Park District work with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources to acquire the area known as Wild Turkey Locks. 2. County and local governments work to ensure that the Ohio to Erie Bike Trail, Panhandle Route, is completed through Coshocton County. 3. If substantial residential growth should occur in any township in the County that does not have a park and/or playground, that either the township Trustees or zoning laws would ensure that parks, playgrounds, and green spaces were constructed. 4. The wetlands area located adjacent to Ridgewood High School should be preserved. Interested parties are encouraged to seek state funding to insure that this ecologically fragile area be saved for future generations.
Back to Top
Residential/ Housing Sub-Committee
Committee Chairs: Tom Barcroft and Larry Endsley
1. Introduction
Any comprehensive Land Use Plan must provide for housing needs of the area residents. The housing must be adequate and affordable and meet the varied needs of present and future Coshocton County residents. Although no significant increase in county population is projected through 2015, the housing needs will change. This is due to older homes becoming obsolete, changes in the demographics of county residents and consumer desires. Residential housing needs must be coordinated with other county needs for land, i.e., industrial and commercial, farming and recreation. Also, the plan must be environmentally friendly. As water and sewer lines radiate from the City of Coshocton, growth of both residential and commercial properties will tend to follow the lines. This trend must be coordinated with the overall residential housing plan.
2. Background
a. Population of Coshocton County has not grown in proportion to overall Ohio growth. Probably the cause of this is very little industrial growth in Coshocton County. From 1900 to 2000, county population increased from 29,337 to 36,655. This represents a percentage increase of 25%. For the same time frame, the total Ohio population increased from 4,157,545 to 11,353,140. This was a 173% increase. Through the year 2015, Coshocton County population is projected to decline to 35,400.
b. The total housing units for Coshocton County in the 1990 census was 14,964. The 2000 census showed the number of housing units as 16,107 for an increase of 7.6% over the past decade. The largest percentage increase of housing units over the past 50 years was in the decade of the 70's to the 80's when the increase was 15.7%. This increase directly coincides with the population increase during that time frame. The number of mobile homes in the 2000 census was 2,625 units which accounted for 16.3% of the total housing units. One-unit, detached accounted for 71.6% of the total housing units. The remaining 12.1% represented for two or more units in one complex. The number of homes built prior to 1940 is 30% of the total existing homes. These homes built prior to 1940 are not energy efficient and, considering the cost of utilities, many of these homes will be replaced. The building trend today is using manufactured homes to fill the need for relatively smaller homes (less than 1500 square feet). Most homes more than 1500 square feet are stick-built homes.
c. Although the total number of housing unit needs will not increase, the aging population of the county will require different types of homes be considered. Fifteen percent of county residents are over the age of 64. Also, 7045 residents are considered disabled. Some needs for the aging and disabled residents have been met by recently completed or planned projects. These include a planned retirement community - Summerfields - just being started. It will contain duplex and apartment style residences. Probably up to 250 units will be constructed. Another completed project for senior citizens is Covington Square. It provides duplexes, about 30 housing units, in an area desirable by seniors. It is close to a large market, a doctor’s office, and the County Senior Citizen Center. Windsorwood Place is another senior living unit which provides assisted care to residents. It has a population of 50 people. Another project under construction is the Autumn Care health center. It will provide more intensive care for its residents. Head count will be approximately 120 people. Also completed recently was a manufactured home park in the Village of Warsaw with 50 to 60 sites.
d. Existing planning in the county. A Regional planning office exists but impacts only subdivisions with lots less than five acres. No county-wide building codes or permit systems exist. Permits are required for water and sewer systems. In 1990, one township attempted to implement zoning, but it was defeated decisively at the ballot.
e. Water and Sewer line expansion. Expansion of the city water and sewer line system to outlying areas was started in 1995 with water going to Pleasant Valley. Presently, water and sewer lines are being extended to the North Corridor, approximately a four-mile expansion. Water and sewer extensions are being made just west of Coshocton. The water and sewer lines will have a great impact on where residences will be built. Smaller lots can be used. Presently to have a well and septic system, your lot must be at least one acre.
f. A four-lane highway bisecting Coshocton County from east to west has been partially completed. The road is complete from Coshocton east to Tuscarawas County and Interstate 77. In the planning stages is the project to continue the four-lane from Coshocton to Muskingum County. The overall thrust of this project is to have a four-lane limited access highway from Pittsburgh to Columbus.
g. Planning Tools. A soil study of Coshocton County has been completed. This study will be of great value in determining the best areas to build homes. One thing the soil study will show is which lands are most adaptable to building sites. The study also shows where reclaimed coal mine lands are. Also existing are flood maps outlining where and where not things can be built.
3. Vision
To meet the needs for residential housing in Coshocton County for the next 20 to 25 years. Although total population is not expected to change significantly, older obsolete homes will need replaced and changes in consumer desires must be met. Also, changes in demographics need to be considered. The county needs for residents’ housing are varied and must be met. We identified certain areas of the county as shown on the attached map to be most desirable for residential building.
4. Goals
a. Encourage infrastructure between West Lafayette and Coshocton.
b. Develop county-wide permit and guideline system for home building. This should enhance the quality of life and economic value of property.
c. Educate residents of permits and steps necessary prior to building a home in the county.
d. County-wide water system.
e. Improve traffic flow over highway between West Lafayette and Coshocton - consider service roads.
f. Coordinate and consider increasing permit fees so as to have some control over development.
g. Don’t concentrate entirely on the West Lafayette-Coshocton area, but consider all parts of the county in Plan.
5. Action Plans
a. Recommend that the Coshocton County Commissioners, with coordination of Regional Planning, implement building codes/regulations for the unincorporated areas of the county.
b. Water and sewer lines between West Lafayette and Coshocton on Route 16 should be completed. This is an area with good possibilities for residential development.
c. The water and sewer lines should also spread out in all directions from Coshocton City.
d. Planners should work closely with Metropolitan Housing and the Habitat for Humanity people.
e. Regional Planning should prepare handbook for new residents/home builders that describe steps necessary in buying home or starting home building process. An example of this is the attached “A Guide to Building and Living in Licking County.”
Back to Top
Technology/ Communications Sub-Committee
Committee Chairs: Danny Brenneman and Dan Erb
A. Introduction
Headlines that read “Plant Closing/ 100s Lose Job’s”, make it vital for a community to look at all it’s options for possible growth. One key component to any economic growth for industrial, residential or education areas is technology. Technology can be the deal breaker in a business contract or it could be the key to revitalizing a residential area as a “bedroom community”. No matter what your area of interest in Coshocton County, technology is the glue that will hold it together and the stimulant that will make it grow.
With our mission statement to “create a flexible infrastructure for reliable, affordable world-class communication technology promoting high-tech residential, educational, and commercial entities in Coshocton County, proactively eradicating the digital divide”, our committee will put forth recommendations and ideas to help make this statement a reality.
There are several aspects of technology that will be addressed in this report. It will cover the need to have conduit, to be used for future communication or technology fiber optics, laid and mapped whenever water and sewer systems are installed or replaced. This would allow for easy access for incoming businesses at less cost. Development of an education policy that will inform business as well as the general public of their options for “linking up” at work or at home. The use of telecommunications to work or study from the home or school will be vital in a society that is becoming more family oriented with each generation. The fast approaching use of wireless communication will require dealing with right of way issues and policies that will need to put into place, to allow for maximum coverage and usage. With so many changes in the technology and communications field, the creation of an advisory committee to follow these changes, would only enhance Coshocton’s ability to stay a step ahead of the competition for future economic development.
To better understand the need for technology in Coshocton County, an assessment of the types of telecommunications and business technology that are present was conducted. Unfortunately not all areas of Coshocton County have access to all of the following types of telecommunication and some have none, others have all, but many are in the middle. The committee broke down the types of communication into 3 categories: voice, internet, and television. The voice category consists of land lines, cellular service, citizen band and H.A.M. radio. Landlines are available to the general public and are used by the phone companies. Cellular service is a hit and miss effort. Half of the county is serviced by one cellular company, the other half of the county is serviced by another. There are numerous “dead” spots and many areas that do not receive any service at all. Some of this due to geography but most is due to lack of towers and relay stations. The Internet category consists of dial up services, cellular, wireless, cable, satellite, DSL and T1 lines. Theses are primarily provided by local computer companies or cable services. There are 2 cable companies that service Coshocton County, Time Warner and Adelphia. Time Warner offers internet access through its cable system. At this time Adelphia does not offer internet access in the Coshocton area but it does offer it in the larger cities. Several local computer companies offer internet service through dial up or wireless abilities. The largest internet access is still dial up. Larger national chains offer satellite hook up and SBC offers DSL and T1 line capabilities for more access to the internet. DSL is a recent addition to the Coshocton area through SBC. It provides service for a 3 mile radius from the SBC building on Walnut. T1 lines have been available for some time in Coshocton but are used primarily by businesses and large industry. They involve laying conduit and costly excavating of earth. The final category of telecommunications is television. This form of communication has been around many years.
Unfortunately in Coshocton County not all residents are able to “connect” and receive cable services. This is due largely to geographic reasons but also because of the wide spread rural population of Coshocton County. Satellite and antennae broadcast is a very large portion of the television services provided in our area. This too is due to rural population. Even though it may seem as if we have several forms of telecommunication in place in Coshocton County, we are still very much behind in making it accessible to all county businesses and residents. Wireless and cellular are the two fastest growing forms of telecommunications and we are sadly lacking in both.
This committee feels that if we want to see our county grow and prosper, the land use plan must have a section that addresses and defines what is needed for Coshocton County in the technology area. As the Technology & Communications Task Force we have taken it upon ourselves to make recommendations and supply ideas to bring these changes and to help Coshocton County to grow to its full potential. Following is our report and recommendations to help “proactively eradicate the digital divide” in Coshocton County.
B. Current Communications Availability
The following maps describe the current availability of communication technologies and service areas for Coshocton County.
1) Coshocton Telephone Service Areas
2) Coshocton SBC ADSL Availability
3) Time-Warner RR Availability
4) CloverNet Wireless Coverage
5) Cellphone Towers and Coverage
6) Right Of Ways
7) Electric Service Areas in Coshocton County
C. Goals
1. Establish provisions for a countywide technology advisory committee.
2. Maintain a continuous assessment of communication and technology availability.
3. Advise concerning best practices for use of public right-of-ways and public spaces for technology and communications applications.
4. Explore the availability of multiple technology and communication options to ensure competitiveness.
5. Establish the importance of technology awareness and education to foster community development.
D. Future Development Technology Requirements
1. Economic Development Requirements
Larger corporations are less affected by today’s technology limitations than the smaller businesses. They will spend the money for a T1 line to their place of business. T1 lines are more expensive in Coshocton ($897/mo) compared to cities like Columbus ($99/mo), but this is not a factor for the larger companies.
Small business must rely on DSL connections and cable for an affordable broadband connection. DSL is coming to West Lafayette and Coshocton through SBC, but the Western side of the county is served by Verizon and will not get DSL in the foreseeable future. Cable access is limited to just where current services are located inside the city limits.
Small companies who have traditionally fought technology advances are now being forced by customers and corporate HQ’s to add connectivity or go out of business. Business needs to conduct business-2-business transactions, distance learning, advertising and web site management.
More companies are also open to telecommuting, allowing employees to live in rural areas like Coshocton County, but still maintain an active role in daily business from their homes. In 1990, our county had 2,562 people commuting outside Coshocton to their daily jobs. I am sure that number has grown significantly today due to the many closings of manufacturing plants in the area.
ROI is a problem for technology companies to substantiate the healthy investment required to serve all areas of the county. Business could take a more active roll in promoting the use of technology in the county though workforce training. The Chamber of Commerce could also take a more active role in the promotion of technology to current business. The more people that use existing technology, the more likely technology companies will be open to investing in our area.
2. Housing Telecommunication Requirements
As bandwidth hungry applications emerge and functionality of the Internet user evolves the need for broadband access will become a reality. Some of the current applications that are driving the residential market today are the demand for CD’s for CD players, downloading games for game consoles and VCR tapes for VCR cassettes. By 2005 it is predicted that each person will carry two digital devices such as PDA’s, cell phones, notebooks and PC tablets. This market will drive the wireless revelation that we enable access at virtually any location.
The current workforce is becoming more mobile. Many professionals want to do more work out of the office. There are a growing number of telecommuters. These applications are current driving factors for broadband. These users need a connection to the office LAN so they can share resources and files. With wireless connections the office can be at any location even making a coffee shop a virtual connection to the office.
Broadband deployment will transform the educational marketplace. On-line classes are currently available from most all universities. With broadband in the home students will no longer need to commute to campuses.
3. Water and Sewer Telecommunication Requirements
When beginning grant writing or running water and sewer lines, we need to also make sure that conduit for technology is worked into the grant so that it can be run at the same time for future county development.
E. Best Public Right-of-Way Practices
A goal of the comprehensive land-use plan is to insure fair and proper use of public rights-of-way (ROW) to promote and enhance the county’s technology infrastructure, capability, and availability. The remainder of this section includes recommended best practices for ROW access for service providers, suggested Coshocton County ROW policies, key considerations for managing provider agreements, and a recommended provision for the formation of a standing county technology advisory committee.
1. Best Practices for ROW Access for Service Providers
a. Access to ROW should be extended to all telecommunications providers, as long as they receive authorization from the appropriate unit of government, given that such authorization shall not be unreasonably denied.
b. Government entities should act on a request for authorization to operate and place equipment in the PROW within a reasonable and fixed period of time from the date that the request for such access is submitted.
c. Authorized providers shall apply for construction permits to place equipment in the PROW with the proper unit of government. Such permits shall be processed within a reasonable and fixed period of time from the date that the request for construction is submitted.
d. The proper unit of government reserves the right to receive fair and reasonable compensation from providers that use PROW. Fees charged for PROW access shall be published in writing and made publicly available by request prior to authorization.
e. All providers should be subject to equivalent terms and conditions of access to the PROW, subject to reasonable alternatives in particular cases, such as overcrowding and/or alternate route planning.
f. For management purposes, the appropriate local authority should be able to identify the owner and the location of all facilities in the PROW. The availability of PROW shall be inventoried and made publicly available.
g. PROW construction permits shall not contain unreasonable terms, qualifications, procedures, or other requirements unrelated to the actual management of the PROW. This does not preclude requirements for proof of authorization, indemnification of liability, insurance bonding, or construction route planning.
h. The appropriate unit of government authority may take into account relevant public safety concerns, zoning and planning regulations as long as they do not unreasonably discriminate among service providers.
i. Standard engineering practices should be used to manage construction in the PROW and to guide the development of any engineering standards involving placement of facilities and equipment in the PROW. Standard engineering practices should include consideration for interferences and incompatibilities with current and future planned improvements.
2. Best Practices for Coshocton County ROW policies
The technology advisory committee should help define the following set of uniform ROW management practices and procedures.
a. Coordination of construction schedules.
b. Insurance, bonding and indemnity requirements.
c. Establishment and enforcement of building codes and other public safety codes, including police and fire codes.
d. The tracking of multiple systems that use the rights-of-way, to prevent interference among them.
e. General time, place and manner of construction regulations.
f. Issuance of permits and/or authorization memorandum prior to excavations or construction work.
g. Relocation procedures.
h. Requirements to repair streets and other public infrastructures to return them to their pre-construction condition.
i. Applicant contact information.
j. A proposed construction schedule and construction map.
3. Key Considerations for Managing Provider Agreements
This committee recommends the adoption of the following best practices for managing agreements between providers and state and local government entities.
a. Timing -- Units of government must act on a request for public rights-of-way access within a reasonable and fixed period of time from the date that the request for such access is submitted, or such request must be deemed approved.
b. Clarity -- The specific steps and appropriate documentation (i.e., documentation must relate to ROW management, rather than the financial, technical, or legal qualifications of the provider) necessary to obtain a permit should be clear and in writing. Each unit of government involved in the process, and its specific requirements, should be identified. To the greatest extent possible, the unit of government that issues permits should be centralized, to avoid requiring multiple or duplicative approvals.
c. Cooperation -- Due to constraints on available space in the existing public rights-of-way, due process must be considered to develop solutions that accommodate both the government's concerns and each industry member's service goals and needs.
d. Fees -- The industry agrees that a local government is entitled to recover fees directly related to the costs it actually incurs to manage the right-of-way as a result of the telecommunications provider's activities in the right-of-way. However, local governments do not uniformly agree with the industry concerning the nature and amount of such fees. Consequently, issues relating to appropriate fees potentially create delays in the permit approval process. For this reason, permits should not be conditioned on the payment of fees, but rather the fee issue should be provisioned in the contract or permit and resolved in a separate process.
F. Technology Education
Technology is an integral part of conducting business and every day life. Many governmental agencies and private businesses expect people to “do business” online. Those without the service or knowledge of computers and the Internet are being left behind.
Access to communications technology services, especially high-speed internet connectivity are imperative to the overall well-being of the Coshocton County economy and individual citizens. Equally imperative is a planned campaign to inform and educate our citizenry to become savvy and knowledgeable technology consumers/users.
a. Develop a county-wide resource of current technology services to simplify the process of connecting and ensure competition
b. Develop business education/assistance/incentive programs to encourage technology use
c. Promote and further develop current access points where individuals can attend technology classes and receive information about services available online
d. Identify, develop and promote communication/ media / technology education to prepare our youth for future opportunities
e. Secure Coshocton County representation on regional and state boards and committees associated with technology expansion and education to act as advocates for the development of technology opportunities in our county. (we’ll need to list the boards & committees)
G. Provisions for a Technology Advisory Committee
With the constantly changing face of technology, our committee feels it is imperative for a new advisory entity position, involving a committee, be instituted. This advisory committee would be responsible for keeping the commissioners and other governing bodies appraised and educated, about new telecommunication and technological advances, on a meeting interval to be decided. This committee would be vital to the continued growth for Coshocton County not only for industrial telecommunications but also for residential areas that could become bedroom communities. With the many changes that are happening daily it is very important that the deciding authorities be well informed and updated on the latest advancements. The following will outline basic provisions for the formation and maintenance of such an advisory committee and include a suggested guide for issues to be addressed as well as duties and authority of the committee.
1. Name:
The committee should be named the Coshocton County Technology Advisory Committee
2. Functions:
The committee should serve in advisory capacity to the Coshocton County Commissioners as well as for other public entities that so choose to utilize the committee’s services. The major function of the committee would be to advise the above entities on technology and communication issues for which the county, city or municipality has an interest in promoting technology to foster growth. The committee would also serve to ensure appropriate coordination of projects and events involving technology with other projects of similar interest. The Coshocton County Commissioners may also delegate to this entity other duties such as reviewing proposals and making recommendations on the purchase of equipment, promoting private expansion of technology, and maintenance and upgrades of publicly utilized technology and services. Some specific duties of this committee are as follows:
a. Establish policies and practices for use of Public Rights of way (PROW) including application, review, and processes for such use.
b. Formulate policy and procedure to ensure due emphasis is placed on technology availability when decisions are made to place new water/sewer lines, regulate new and existing housing developments, economic development, and other cooperative improvement efforts.
c. Ensure proper communication, collaboration and awareness among entities (public and private) providing technology/communication services.
d. Promote public awareness of planned technology related projects or procurement.
e. Other specific technology related tasks as assigned by Coshocton County Commissioners.
f. Formulate policies and procedures for use of publicly owned buildings for the placement of private transmission equipment to encourage competition in the industry.
g. Create awareness of and encouragement for increased importance in usage and education of technology.
3. Committee Composition:
This committee should be composed of representatives appointed and/or approved by the Commissioners and should represent both public and private sector. Each should have knowledge and experience in technology/communication issues and have the capacity to adequately advise the Commissioners on such issues.
Note: Should the proposal for such committee be accepted, the following will be considered in creating policies or bylaws to govern the committee and its functions.
a. Process for appointment to the committee
b. Process for resignation or removal
c. Composition /number of appointments/committee positions
d. Conflict of interest policy
e. Meeting schedule/venue
f. Process for reporting or making recommendations to the Commissioners
H. Summary
Back to Top
Tourism Sub-Committee
Committee Chairs: Bob Guilliams and Linda Scott
Committee Members: Mary Ellen Given, Susan Norris, Jerry McKenna, Chester Loos, Gil Hunter, Catherine Howard, Andrea Schweitzer, and Nanci Rogers
I. HISTORICAL ANALYSIS
Tourism as a recognizable industry in Coshocton County was non-existent until the restoration of Historic Roscoe Village in the late 1960’s. In 1980 the Coshocton County Convention and Visitor’s Bureau was established to promote the area. The emergence of interest in the Amish Culture in the 80’s provided enhanced opportunities for tourist travel with Amish settlements located in the North and North Eastern Regions of the County and extending into Holmes, Knox and Tuscarawas Counties. The Early 1990’s saw the nationally promoted AMERIFLORA come to Franklin County. Because there were limited lodging facilities available, tourists traveled to the remote areas seeking food and places to stay, which included Coshocton County. Also in the 1990’s, the expansion of the Longaberger Company, the largest manufacturer of handmade baskets in the USA, with facilities in Muskingum and Licking counties, created marketing opportunities for Coshocton County because of it’s central location between the popular basket manufacturer and Amish country. The construction in the mid-1990’s of several lodging and restaurant facilities improved the county’s position as a destination. In the late 1990’s and 2000, improvements implemented at Coshocton Lake Park, that included the restoration of the Pavilion, construction of the Playvilion, Aquatic Center and development of a recreational trail, provided additional sites to increase tourist traffic. In 2000, the completion of the 4-lane US-36 E highway between Coshocton and Interstate 77 dramatically increased traffic flow through the heart of the county.
It is anticipated that the next quarter century will bring more tourists into the area because of the national trend of families to take shorter, yet more frequent “day” or week-end trips that tend to avoid high population and high-risk destinations.
It is believed that this trend will put pressure on rural and less frequented destinations. This pressure will induce a natural tendency for commercial expansion, and in doing so will also put pressure on the use of land once considered as open space, agricultural or undeveloped.
II. INDUSTRY ANALYSIS
Tourism is vital for the future of Coshocton County. It provides a solid base for growth and development, generating economic benefits as a multi-million dollar industry, leading to new job creation and enhancing quality-of-life by merging the heritage of our past with modern tourism facilities, and providing educational and recreational opportunities for both visitors and residents.
Tourism in Coshocton County includes a range of sites, facilities and events that are diverse. Usage levels of local facilities are greatest in the summer, while promotion of activities in the fall has lengthened the tourist season. Springtime visitation is more site-specific with seasonal availability of limited outdoor facilities. Winter activities have shown low results keyed to negative climate perceptions. Over the past twenty years, we have seen the positive impact tourism has had on Coshocton County. The future of this industry in Coshocton County should be just as bright as its past. We envision the continued development of the Tourism Industry in this county to sharpen its focus around the areas in which we have had proven successes:
Historical Sites
Recreational parks and facilities
Wildlife Sportsmanship
The Tourist is difficult to define. The United States Travel and Tourism Administration generally includes anyone who travels overnight or on a day trip of more than 100 miles within this category. With a diversity of attractions, events and reasons for traveling here, visitors include families, senior citizens, motorcoach tours, outdoor enthusiasts, educational groups, school tours, international visitors, historians, and business, conferences and conventions. These visitors create an economic impact with minimal cost to the community. Local infrastructure serves residents as well as visitors and facilities designed to be attractive to visitors are available for local usage creating a better quality of life for Coshocton County residents.
Based on visitor numbers, Roscoe Village and the Lake Park Complex are at the center of the present Coshocton County Tourism Industry. (Tourism Map/Present) This focus is primarily due to three factors; (1) facility, (2) geographic location, and (3) promotion. A 10-year Traffic Survey (1992-2001) indicates an increase ranging from 10% to 70% in traffic flow at major intersections throughout Coshocton County.
The future focuses on the enhancement and preservation of our historic sites. This would include the preservation of the canal locks and Roscoe Village, the development of our Indian heritage as it relates to tourism and the preservation of historic buildings and sites relevant to Coshocton County history. We believe that there needs to be an understanding of the value of such historic venues to the point that the encroachment of modern development into these areas should be discouraged
Recreational facilities should continue to be a draw for the county. Parks should be established in addition to Lake Park and the community should focus on the continued enhancement of unique park venues throughout the county. Water activities should be enhanced along the three rivers, making use of these scenic waterways.
Sporting venues such as Woodbury, Mohawk Dam and Wills Creek should be developed to call attention to our hunting and sporting competition arenas. The areas around these districts should be developed to encourage tourism-related businesses that are compatible with outdoor sports.
Entertainment and Cultural development should be encouraged in areas where existing and planned infrastructure are suitable. Infrastructure should have sufficient capacity to accommodate the added development without an unreasonable cost to the community after considering the benefits of added jobs and economic enhancement.
It is equally as important that any development is of a standard that contributes to a positive experience for visitors and improves the physical appearance of the county, particularly on major tourist routes. However, commercial facilities must be provided to meet local and tourist demands, but avoid over-excessive, strip-commercial development.
Flexibility is key in the location of tourism facilities. This approach recognizes the contribution that the tourism industry makes to the county’s economy and the need to be innovative and flexible in the development of tourist infrastructure.
III. VISION STATEMENT
Coshocton County’s Tourism Industry will be recognized as a viable and vital segment of the economic future of the community-at-large by maintaining existing tourism ventures, and promoting and encouraging new development.
This shall be accomplished with regard to the surrounding environment and neighboring land uses to preserve its unique heritage, culture and landscape.
IV. NEAR-TERM GOALS, STRATEGIES and RECOMMENDATIONS
GOAL 1
The County will take a position to protect, preserve and/or restore publicly or privately recognized historic sites, landmarks and structures.
STRATEGY
- Work jointly and cooperatively with individuals, private developers, and government agencies to encourage responsible and realistic use of land in areas of known historical significance. This should take into account the prevention of development within a predetermined space so as not to cause structural damage, inappropriate noise pollution or impair the visual esthetics of the site.
- The development of public roads, bridges, right-of-ways, and utilities should be completed in a way that promotes tourism yet also encourages preservation and/or restoration of land containing historical sites.
- This should be done without unreasonably discouraging private enterprise and the responsible development of lands surrounding and adjacent to the historical site.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Designate a land border that will be maintained in the land surrounding the restored section of the canal in Lake Park. An ample stretch of land and sufficient tree line should be maintained in the land adjacent to the canal to preserve the aesthetic beauty of the view and the quiet nature of the ride.
2. Develop a plan for the alteration of traffic patterns to decrease traffic flow through Roscoe Village. As the properties at the extension of Hill and High Streets develop, increased motor traffic proportionally increases noise pollution and adds to safety concerns.
3. Preserve the property surrounding the Old Stone Fort along Route 36 as it continues to develop.
4. Develop a plan for the preservation of the Triple Locks. As clearly a one-of-a-kind venue, this unique example of the canal heritage could be further restored as a Park attraction and/or as a very significant teaching tool.
5. Recognizing that adding a historical hotel/landmark building would offer tourists overnight accommodations, encourage the revitalization of the original Park Hotel building in the downtown area.(Tourism Map/City of Coshocton) This would be accomplished by the following: (a) recommend the Mayor protect the building from demolition; (b) encourage the sale of the building with the intention of renovation while offering tax abatements; (c) encourage development of a marketing plan through cooperation of downtown and Towne Center merchants offering evening hours that would accommodate hotel guests with shopping and entertainment options.
GOAL 2
Encourage officials to initiate and enforce appropriate legislation that reduces visual and noise pollution that detracts from Coshocton County’s scenic landscape.
STRATEGY
- Develop a plan to ensure that visitors to our community are greeted and depart with a positive impression/experience.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Land along highways and waterways should be free from accumulations of unsightly debris including billboards, salvage yards, etc.
2. Land should be used to create inviting entrances and exits to municipalities. Create areas of pocket landscaping near signage
3. Uniformity of signage with the creation of a Coshocton County Logo that depicts/supports the historical/cultural philosophy.
V. LONG-TERM GOALS, STRATEGIES and RECOMMENDATIONS
GOAL 1
Encourage the development of a county multi-purpose exhibition center
STRATEGY
- Develop a multi-purpose complex that would place emphasis on Coshocton County’s agricultural culture while providing space for other events. (Tourism Map/Future) Location in the North Corridor would provide easy access from US 36, SR 16, SR 93, SR 83, I-77 and Richard Downing Airport.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Relocate the Coshocton County Fairgrounds to the North Corridor. Construction would include a multi-purpose exhibition center that would be utilized for conventions, private events and recreational opportunities. The facility would be configured to permit the flexibility to handle one large event (trade shows, automobile shows, etc.) or could be broken into smaller venues to accommodate simultaneous events.
GOAL 2
Encourage tourism growth close to municipalities to take advantage of existing and planned infrastructure.
STRATEGY
- Recognizing that locating additional attractions, hotels and recreational facilities near already functioning tourist attractions adds to the perceived value of each entity, develop a plan to pursue businesses that compliment the established tourism sites.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Guide the development of a technology plan for the county that supports the various technological standards that business travelers and convention planners expect in their host communities. Special attention must be paid to implementing the best possible technological enhancements without infringing on the aesthetic appeal of the county.
2. Identify areas that have ample water/sewer access to accommodate hotels, restaurants, campgrounds, etc. The intersection at SR93 and US36 could serve as the eastern gateway to Coshocton County and northward to Amish Country(Tourism Map/Future).
3. When the four-lane SR16 West is constructed toward Columbus, the municipality of Conesville will be the site of enhanced commercial tourist opportunities. The issues of sewer/water and infrastructure enhancements in that area will be critical to the development of tourism.
GOAL 3
Develop, maintain and improve the quality of surface water resources, utilizing them for recreational sites, where appropriate.
STRATEGY
- Review the current lakes and rivers for access and development. Encourage the development of man-made lakes as other growth continues, recognizing the quality of the lakes for aesthetic value and recreational use.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Encourage ecologically friendly development of the rivers for recreational use.
2. Take an active role in the encouragement of the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District’s efforts to enhance recreational development on MWCD land (Tourism Map/(Future).
3. Encourage development of the Wills Creek area as a recreational asset (Tourism Map/Future) through cooperation with the Wills Creek Conservancy District.
GOAL 4
Encourage conservation of environmentally sensitive areas and promote preservation of natural resources
STRATEGY
- Capitalize on the likelihood that, as the Akron/Canton area, Cleveland, and Columbus become increasingly developed, under-populated, rural, scenic counties such as Coshocton will become increasingly popular as outdoor recreational venues. Assets such as the county’s rivers, lakes, and wildlife areas (i.e. Woodbury) will continue to draw large numbers of hunters, fishermen and outdoor enthusiasts. These areas should be recognized as tourism assets and preparation should be made to develop the adjacent lands to accommodate increased tourism
- Vacation home site development
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Promote the development of cabins, lodges and vacation homes around lakes, parks and natural wildlife to attract vacation tourism and lodging.
2. Analyze the areas in the southern part of the county (those near Wills Creek or adjacent to Woodbury) for potential campground facilities. With the popularity of the Lake Park camping facilities, it would seem that Coshocton County could use more campgrounds. One of these alternate sites would be a nice addition to the park system.
GOAL 5
Encourage development of cultural/entertainment venues in geographic areas where existing & planned infrastructure permits
STRATEGY
- Recognize that if Coshocton County has the sites, what happens if they come, as most cultural venues strive to accommodate large crowds; (a) there should be ample parking available to accommodate the cultural tourist; (b) water/sewer and ingress/egress issues are vital to their success.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Completion of the Coshocton Performing Arts Center complex with construction of parking facility near or adjacent to the venue (Tourism Map/City of Coshocton).
2. Utilizing the natural hill terrain, develop an outdoor amphitheater for plays, concerts, and festivals where geographically feasible.
GOAL 6
Guide tourism growth throughout the county in a way that such growth does not have a negative impact on local municipalities, communities or residents of the county
STRATEGY:
- Evaluate adequacy of food services/lodging sites to accommodate tourism growth
- A proven theory in the Tourism
Industry is the concept that more attractions in one area bring more
visitors. In other words, the guest is looking for a wealth of
things to do in one concentrated area. Therefore, partnering together
from the inception to build strong attractions should be encouraged.
New attractions should share, at least to some extent, their plans
with other existing attractions to create venues that will draw additional
travelers.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Establish through the CVB a task force of individuals who would act as consultants for incoming attractions, hotels, etc. hence encouraging coordinated land development.
2. As new venues approach the municipalities for approvals, etc., they will be encouraged to share their plans with other tourism entities in the county to optimize all partnering efforts. As a group, there will be a stronger force to suggest optimum uses of land for tourism.
GOAL 7
Encourage development of wildlife sportsmanship outdoor & recreational opportunities in compatible geographic areas
STRATEGY
- Recognizing that Coshocton County has abundant sites due to a variety of topography, numerous new venues could be created to capitalize on growing awareness of outdoor recreation. This strategy would lead to the creation of satellite commercial tourist opportunities.
- Evaluate pre-existing trails and support the development of new paths that may lead to intercounty/state-wide venue.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Utilizing hill terrain, encourage entrepreneurial development of recreational activities that promote cold weather usage.
2. Encourage development of abandoned strip mine areas for moto-cross (extreme sport) attractions where appropriate.
3. In addition to existing sites, development of remote land to accommodate shooting sports (Sporting Clay Academy).
4. Conversion of abandoned railroad beds to tie-into Rails to Trails.
5. Expansion of Horseback Riding Trails in the Conesville area (Tourism Map/Future) and development of new trails in areas where the terrain is appropriate.
6. Continue the development of bicycle and walking trails for access to tourist attractions including historic sites, parks and recreation venues.
Back to Top
Transportation Sub-Committee
Committee Chairs: Don Brown and Chuck Willis
Committee Members: Rob Duffy, Deb Edwards-Laney, Kathy Hendricks, Gary Keller, Dr. James Kleinknecht, Thomas Novak, Mark Sharrock, Bethel Toler, and Fred Wachtel
Introduction
Coshocton County’s transportation system has evolved over the last 200 years from dirt paths to major 4-lane highways including railroads, paved municipal streets, and an expanded airport. These goals have been developed, revised, and implemented by individuals, committees, and visionaries of Coshocton County. The thoroughfare system in Coshocton County is well established and if, correctly defined, future additions and improvements will enhance the social and economic growth in the area.
The following provides current and future maps for Coshocton County transportation system. This will include a narrative for each future addition and improvement to the existing system. These objectives will be established within the overall Coshocton Land Use Plan.
Vision Statement:
The vision for Coshocton County is to provide a logistical transport system that allows all individuals to travel in the county - efficiently, effectively, and affordably - which will enhance the quality of life.
Goals:
Review the current transportation system:
Highways
County and Township roads.
Rail Road System
Airport
All municipal streets
Purpose is to formulate a future plan on the land use for the logistical transportation system for Coshocton County.
Highways
Currently, there are 1,199 miles of roads within Coshocton and 307 bridges. The miles of roads are designated as follows:
State Highways 224
County Roads 352
Township Roads 623
Any new road right-of-ways for residential, commercial, and industrial developments should be a minimum of 40 feet from the centerline through the property. This will allow sufficient width for future maintenance and expansion if the traffic pattern is warranted.
State Route 16 – 4 Lane Highway:
There will be an expansion of the four-lane highway through Coshocton within the next 20 years on State Route 16. The expansion of the highway will be limited access with minimal interchanges.
The recommendations for this improvement are as follows:
- The actual route should be chosen to minimize the impact on existing county residents.
- The actual route should utilize as much State owned property (Woodbury Wildlife Area)as possible.
- A highway light will have to be installed at the intersection of US 36 and State Route 621.
- State Route 621 will have to be widened to allow for more traffic traveling to the North due to the planned retirement facility to be located approximately 2 miles from the above mentioned intersection.
- Township Road 287 should be improved to become a County road. This will improve access to AEP Company. Would need to be coordinated with the Village of Conesville.
- The upgrade of SR 16 to limited access will nessitate the improvement of some county and township roads to maintain access for local traffic. The possible roads affected are County Road 6, Township Roads 282, 283, and 306.
- The current State Route 16 from the county line on the south county line to the existing four lane highway may become a county road.
- Any access roads will need
to be established and maintained to allow our citizens to travel
to state highways.
US 36 will need to be improved to possibly 4 lanes from the Village of Warsaw to the intersection of State Route 16 and US 36.
All remaining state highways should have adequate capacity to serve the county citizens for the next 20 years.
ODOT should continue their program of spot safety improvements to reduce hazard areas.
ODOT should improve all their bridges to the legal load limits.
County Roads
All county roads should meet the following requirements:
- Width should be 20’ of paved surface.
- A resurfacing program should be completed every 10 years.
- All bridges should be upgraded
to legal load limit and be minimum 18’ wide.
The township trustees should be encouraged to widen and improve the roads under their jurisdictions, as funds become available.
Platted but never built roads, and built but later abandoned roads should be reviewed and possibly vacated.
City Streets within Coshocton County
The City of Coshocton should construct an overpass from Bank Street traveling West over the Ohio Central railroad and connect into Second Street. This may be connected into the Free Mini-mall. A side street from Brown’s Lane will be made to connect into the new street to allow access over the railroad.
Another railroad crossing should be considered at Pine Street in the City of Coshocton. This will be a gated crossing.
Third Street in the City of Coshocton should be extended to the street where the Stop light is going onto Wal-Mart.
Skyline Heights in the City of Coshocton should be extended to meet Hillcrest Drive. This will alleviate the problem of only having one access to Hillcrest and Ridgewood Drives.
The City of Coshocton should consider the possibility of another access into the town. A bridge could be constructed across the Muskingum River at Brown’s Lane to State Route 16 looking west.
The villages of Warsaw and West Lafayette will continue to make regular improvements to the street as normal. There are no major changes in the future.
All municipalities should consider upgrading all sidewalks to be handicapped accessible. Funding may also be available from the State or Federal governments.
Railroad System
The current railroad system has been in existence since 1855 with upgrades continually being performed. There are 65 miles of track currently in Coshocton County.
Funding needs to be pursued to improve the grade railroad crossings in the county, including the installation of additional gated crossings.
Future plans to be considered are a High Speed Passenger Railroad from Columbus to Pittsburgh, which will travel through Coshocton County.
One main goal for the railroad system - the infrastructure should maintain the current right of way for the double track. Only one track is currently in place. To lose this valuable asset would hinder the development and growth of Coshocton County.
Airport
Currently, the Richard Downing Airport is under going a building improvement and taxiway expansion project. The National Guard will be located at the airport in the near future.
The landing runway is 4,100 feet in length. This needs to be extended to 5,000 feet within the next 5 years.
A new access road to the facility is recommended by the construction of a two lane county road from either CR193 or SR 621. The new road should be considered due to new business development around the Canal Lewisville area. Access to the airport from US 36 via County Road 202 may need to be accomplished by an overhead intersection if the new 4-lane highway becomes a restricted highway.
In addition to the access road to the airport, new funds should be considered for more hangars to be installed. Several Coshocton area pilots are currently storing airplanes at other airports outside of Coshocton County.
Back to Top
Water & Sewage Sub-Committee
Committee Chair: Tom Scott
Committe Member: Don Wells
This report contains recommendations regarding placement and utilization of existing and potential water and sewage lines within Coshocton County. Conclusions utilized in creating this report are a result of having absorbed a vast expanse of available written material on the subject together with attending a number of meetings with a variety of residents plus appointed and/or elected county and state officials. The report is non-partisan in nature. It is hoped and anticipated it will be accepted in that context.
Currently the City of Coshocton and the villages of West Lafayette and Warsaw provide water and sewer lines to segregated sections of our County. None of the various utilities are at maximum capacity.
It is highly recommended that elected county, city, village and township officials come together in an environment of open compromise in establishing a common goal of creating an integrated countywide water and sewer district. It is further recommended that such a goal setting agenda evolve in an atmosphere explicitly void of the isolationist/segregationist attitude that is prevalent within our county today. This attitude has severely hampered the current and potential commercial and residential growth within Coshocton County. Growth has also been substantially hampered by the inability of various existing appointed committees to recognize one another and work together.
In establishing such a countywide district, it is recommended that water and sewer lines be designated for placement and/or expansion within those areas of the county identified herein as viable growth areas by our committee. Again, this plan must rid itself of the existing thinking within certain municipal areas that has limited the creation of a viable countywide water and sewer plan.
It is our recommendation that water and sewer lines be extended the entire length of the existing four-lane “route 36 corridor” northeasterly to county line, to tie in with existing lines running from 36 to West Lafayette, as well as to other identified areas of existing or potential growth patterns. These identified/recommended areas are as follows:
• State Route 16 from Coshocton southwesterly to county line
• State Route 36 from Coshocton northwesterly to county line
• County Road 16 from Coshocton easterly to county line
In doing so, Coshocton County will be taking a giant stride in becoming a viable player and entity within Ohio’s growth into the 22nd century. A multitude of grants and alternative financing plans are available to municipalities to utilize in expanding existing water and sewer lines. These financial vehicles are in a flux of constant change, and are available from Federal and State agencies, as well as certain private sectors. We have elected to not include a listing of the agencies that provide these various financial vehicles. It is the opinion of our subcommittee that a countywide committee must be formed to aggressively research, apply for and garner these types of funding.
In closing, we are of the opinion a non-partisan, united effort by elected officials within our entire county can result in the procurement of funding to facilitate an infrastructure of water and sewer lines in a manner that will vastly enhance the systematic evolution of commercial and residential growth within our county. This type of united county infrastructure, together with a commitment to establish mutually beneficial planning and working relationships with adjoining counties, will prove critical to our Land Use Report attaining maximum potential.
We recognize the absolute need for our completed Land Use Report to be acknowledged by elected county officials as a vehicle to be utilized as a constant source of reference and direction in the systematic evolution of Coshocton County’s growth. It is our sincere desire to see that our Land Use Report does not fall victim to its predecessor; being set aside to collect dust and be ignored by existing and future elected officials. We take pride in the efforts of our subcommittee in providing our recommendations. We sincerely hope the unwavering efforts and commitment provided by every member of the various subcommittees that contributed to our Land Use Report are recognized and respected by those elected officials to whom it is entrusted.
Back to Top