Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff outlines upcoming Chesapeake Bay rule changes, resiliency assessments and tree protections
Summary
Assistant Director Meg Pittenger briefed the commission on state-mandated changes to Chesapeake Bay preservation-area rules, including required resiliency assessments (default 30-year lifespan), emphasis on preserving mature trees, and nature-based adaptation measures; staff will prepare ordinance updates and application guidance.
Meg Pittenger, assistant director of planning, on Aug. 19 gave commissioners an overview of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area program and upcoming regulatory changes required by state law.
Pittenger summarized the program’s purpose—to prevent nonpoint-source pollution into the Bay and its tributaries—and reviewed core elements: the 100-foot resource protection area (RPA) buffer, the resource management area, and permitted uses inside RPAs (water-dependent uses and limited redevelopment that does not increase impervious cover). She reminded commissioners that in Suffolk the RPA also includes 100-foot buffers around drinking-water reservoirs such as Lake Cahoon.
Pittenger explained state code changes adopted beginning in 2020 require localities to incorporate resiliency assessments into RPA applications. Applicants must evaluate sea-level rise, storm surge and flooding over a project lifespan (the default lifespan in the forthcoming guidance is 30 years, though applicants may specify shorter periods) using state-provided models such as the Virginia Flood Risk Information System or AdaptVA. The assessment must identify adaptation measures or project alterations to address identified risks. Pittenger said adaptation measures should be nature-based where feasible and maximize preservation of existing vegetation, including mature trees.
The presentation also outlined new state-driven requirements to protect “mature trees” (defined by DEQ criteria as canopy trees at least 12 inches diameter at breast height and understory trees at least 4 inches DBH). Pittenger said the draft ordinance will require applicants to identify mature trees on plans, protect them with fencing during construction, remove them only when necessary and prefer pruning/trimming over removal. Replanting with native species and tracking tree-protection measures during construction will be emphasized.
Pittenger said the Planning Department will prepare ordinance amendments, an updated exception application with resiliency-assessment checklists, and guidance documents. She said staff will include the assessments and staff’s findings in future exception or development packages for planning commission review. Commissioners asked whether staff reports will include checklists and guidance; Pittenger said yes and said staff will provide a breakdown of how applications meet the new findings when the ordinance is adopted.
No action was required; the briefing was informational and intended to prepare commissioners for changes to UDO language and application requirements.
