I
n today’s environmentally conscious world, many folks have heard about the Chesapeake Bay Preservation
Area (CBPA) ordinances and regulations. However, not many people actually understand the implications of those regulations regarding the improvement of their land. In 1989, all cities and counties with lands lying east of Interstate 95 were required to adopt language contained in a model state ordinance requiring a percentage reduction of nutrients and sediment discharging into the Chesapeake Bay. These ordinances generally became known as the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Overlay District in most locations affected by the State Code. The primary goal of reducing pollutants into the Bay is accomplished by the creation of a 100 foot wide buffer strip along the Bay and its tributaries including any adjacent tidal wetlands and non-tidal, upland wetlands which have perennial stream flow or contiguous surface flow. This buffer strip and the adjacent ecologically sensitive areas are known as Resource Protection Areas (RPA). All areas outside of this RPA, either defined by a set distance or possibly the balance of the land contained within a jurisdiction, were considered to be Resource Management Areas (RMA). Development within a RPA would only allow improvements which could be considered “water dependent.” These “water dependent” features would typically include docks, drainage outfalls and other uses that would need to be constructed near the water by necessity. Development within a RMA would be allowed for any improvements providing that water quality standards are met through the use of stormwater “best management practices” (BMP). These BMPs are designed to treat stormwater to improve its water quality characteristics and may also reduce the increased stormwater run-off created by the addition of the improvement’s impervious cover. This impervious cover typically consists of rooftops, driveways, parking lots and other improvements which would prevent the natural infiltration of stormwater into the existing soils. For the average current or future homeowner, construction within the Resource Protection Area is prohibited by law unless the purpose can be proven to meet water dependent criteria or no
The House & Home Magazine
Photo by Dawn Howeth
other alternative exists. If the improvement currently exists within a RPA, then addi- tions or renovations may be allowed to be made to the structure. This situation usually involves the preparation of a Water Quality Impact Assessment which helps identify the ecological resources potentially being impaired by the proposal and establishes design criteria which may help to mitigate the impacts to the environment. These studies and plans are then reviewed by the locality’s environmental staff and may be presented to the governing body’s approval authority, sometimes consisting of a public hearing board such as the locality’s Planning Commission. Construction
within the Resource Management Area (RMA) is substantially easier as proposed improvements are only subjected to the erosion and sediment control and impervious cover requirements of the regulations. The erosion and sediment control criteria is a continuation of the earlier Erosion and Sediment Control laws in effect since the 1970s and more recently updated and expanded within the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP). The impervious cover regulations in place today generally allow any property owner to cover 16 percent of their total land area with impervious
87
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100