Planning commission defers decision on Chesapeake Bay exception for pool at 2811 Acres Road

The Portsmouth Planning Commission on Oct. 7 deferred a decision to Nov. 18 on an application by Greg and Rachel Stone for a Chesapeake Bay exception to construct an in‑ground fiberglass pool and concrete apron within the 100‑foot resource protection area (RPA) buffer at 2811 Acres Road.

Staff frame and recommendation Principal Planner Valerie Malzone summarized the application and the exception criteria under City Code Chapter 9.1. Malzone reported that the proposed 12.5‑by‑25‑foot fiberglass pool and accompanying concrete deck would create a net increase of 780 square feet of impervious surface in the RPA, and that about 55% of the 0.8‑acre lot sits in the RPA. Staff found the request "is not in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act," and recommended denial, while identifying possible conditions should the commission approve the exception.

Applicants and mitigation Applicant Greg Stone told commissioners the pool will be a prefabricated fiberglass unit that is craned into a precisely‑sized excavation to limit disturbance. "It's a fiberglass pool, limited excavation site," Stone said, describing a plan to minimize overdig and to install mitigation plantings in the buffer. Stone said the applicant proposes three planting units on site and is seeking plant stock consistent with riparian buffer guidance.

Commissioner questions and neighborhood context Commissioners asked whether adjacent properties had pools and whether approving one request could encourage others. Planning staff said several homes on the opposite side of the man‑made lake have pools and that circumstances can differ parcel to parcel; the code requires case‑by‑case findings such as whether an exception is "the minimum necessary to afford relief" and whether granting the exception would confer a special privilege to the applicant.

Action and next steps A motion to deny the request was made but failed to secure a second and therefore died. The commission later voted to defer the application to the Nov. 18, 2025 planning commission work session to allow staff to research the history of pools on neighboring lots and provide additional information; the motion to defer carried by a recorded vote of 5–1. Staff noted a deferral would not require the applicant to pay a new resubmittal fee.

Impact and context The request raises recurring questions about how to apply RPA exception criteria on small lots and how to weigh neighborhood practice (preexisting pools) when many lots within the area predate the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. Staff advised commissioners that offsets or mitigation plantings are required when impervious cover increases in the buffer; the applicant proposed mitigation plantings to meet guidance in the riparian buffers modification and mitigation manual.

Public comment There were no public speakers registered for the item at the hearing. The commission deferred action to allow staff to assemble additional factual context before a recommendation vote.