Commission reviews text amendment 25‑13: critical area updates add climate resiliency language and other revisions

Planning staff presented proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments 25‑13 to the Calvert County Planning Commission on July 16. The revisions respond to the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Critical Area Commission review and would update the county’s critical area provisions to emphasize climate resiliency, modify review timelines, and add technical definitions and allowances.

Will Hager, Planner III, and Ron Marney, the county’s environmental planner, summarized the main changes. The amendments add goals to the critical area section to "reduce vulnerability to the impacts of climate change and incorporate measures to improve the climate resiliency of the Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays and its tributaries" and to "ensure an equitable distribution of the burdens and benefits of development, mitigation, restoration, conservation, and adaptation to climate change in the critical area."

A key procedural change would alter the required comprehensive review cycle for the critical area provisions and maps from every six years to every ten years, with a one‑year extension available if the county notifies the Critical Area Commission in writing. Marney said that language was provided by DNR and is intended to align local mapping cycles with state expectations; commissioners questioned the logic of lengthening the interval and discussed the possibility of initiating an earlier review if emerging data (for example, from a major storm) warranted it.

Another substantive change would allow a limited increase in development area (up to 500 square feet) where permeable pavers or permeable pavement—installed to manufacturer specifications—are used; the perviousness of products would be negotiated with the Department of Planning and Zoning and is expected to fall within a 10–50% perviousness range depending on the product. Staff said permeable pavement options (porous asphalt, pervious concrete, permeable interlocking concrete pavers) provide water‑quality and groundwater‑recharge benefits and can reduce net impervious cover.

The draft also clarifies critical area map‑change criteria (for correcting misclassifications) and updates definitions—most notably clarifying that accessory dwelling units are examples of dwelling units but will not count toward a parcel’s permitted density unless otherwise stated.

Commissioners raised several questions: one asked whether a ten‑year review cadence might undercount near‑term shoreline changes related to severe storms or sea‑level trends; staff responded the ten‑year timeline is a regulatory minimum and the county could initiate reviews sooner if warranted. Another commissioner expressed concern that the phrase "areas vulnerable to climate change as identified by the county" was vague and could grant broad discretion; staff and legal counsel said the county would use existing data sets (for example, FEMA flood maps) and established criteria to identify higher‑risk areas and that more specific mapping would be maintained as part of the critical area process.

Legal counsel reviewed wording in the Prince Frederick chapter (also discussed earlier in the meeting) and recommended a small drafting change: where the draft states a project "shall be deferred for a period of 6 years," counsel suggested changing to "up to 6 years" to reflect the typical formulation in Maryland law.

Why it matters: The amendment package would align local ordinances with state critical area guidance, add explicit climate‑resiliency goals, provide limited flexibility for pervious paving, and clarify definitions that affect density and lot‑coverage calculations.

Next steps: Staff said the work session was informational and that it will proceed with the public adoption process, including a joint public hearing with the Board of County Commissioners tentatively scheduled for August 20. No formal action was taken at the work session.