Montgomery County staff prepare local ordinance to align with Virginia

Montgomery County staff told the Planning Commission on Oct. 9 that they are preparing a local ordinance to implement Virginia's consolidated erosion and stormwater regulations and hope to present the ordinance to the Board of Supervisors for adoption at the board's December meeting. "We're currently working on an updated ordinance that reflects the combined regulations," said Scott Woodrum, who presented the update.

The presentation summarized changes required by the state: the General Assembly directed consolidation in 2016, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and a regulatory advisory panel developed replacement rules, and the State Water Control Board approved the Virginia Erosion and Stormwater Management Regulation in 2023; the regulation became effective in 2024. Woodrum said the new DEQ handbook replaces older guidance documents, including a 1992 erosion-and-sediment-control handbook and a 1999 stormwater handbook, and introduces new land-cover types and calculation methods intended to improve how engineers account for nutrient offsets and water-quality credits.

Woodrum told commissioners the county must update local forms and draft a guidance manual to help the engineering community apply the new spreadsheets and land-cover categories. "We are creating a guidance manual for the engineering community," he said, describing staff plans to distribute the manual for comment and then present findings in a work session and public hearing before the ordinance goes to the Board of Supervisors.

Commissioners asked detailed implementation questions. Woodrum explained how plan submittals route through planning staff and VDOT for review, and how thresholds determine state versus local review: land disturbances of 10,000 square feet to an acre are handled through county land-disturbance permits; projects of an acre or more require state registration and a letter of coverage. He also described the county's inspection and closeout process, including regular construction inspections and documentation of as-built stormwater BMPs required at project completion.

The commission pressed staff about bonding requirements. Chair Rice expressed concern that bond costs add to housing expense and asked whether bonds remain necessary when banks underwrite projects. Woodrum said the county uses line-item estimates to calculate bond amounts and that there are separate E&S bonds, stormwater bonds and planning bonds. He confirmed a bond had been revoked under a prior county engineer about 10–14 years ago but deferred legal specifics about state requirements to the county attorney.

Woodrum said bond-reduction requests are routinely evaluated and often approved when staff determines a reduction is appropriate. "When we receive them, we thoroughly go through and evaluate whether that bond could be reduced," he said.

Next steps outlined by staff include finalizing the guidance manual, soliciting feedback from engineers, holding a public hearing on the proposed local ordinance, and seeking full adoption at the board's December meeting.

The Planning Commission did not take any formal regulatory votes on the ordinance at this meeting; staff indicated the next formal decision will come after the public comment period and the Board of Supervisors review.