| Recently effective updates to Chapter 118 of the Fairfax County Code (a.k.a., the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance) have wrought some significant changes. While primarily bringing the Ordinance in-line with the new state stormwater regulations, significant changes to definitions and allowed uses were also made, affecting requirements for development, redevelopment, and stormwater facilities. |
| |
| The first significant changes were to the definitions for Development, Impervious area, and Redevelopment. |
• |
Development is now defined as “…the construction, rehabilitation, rebuilding or substantial alteration of residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, recreational, transportation, or utility, uses, facilities or structures.” Deleted from this definition is the reference to net increases in impervious area with RPAs and RMAs, when compared to prior development. |
• |
The definition for Impervious area deleted the clause that “Impervious area” does not include the water surface of a swimming pool. The intense lobbying by the swimming pool industry in 1991-1993 era has been undone. |
• |
Redevelopment is now defined as “… the process of developing land that is or has been previously developed.” This definition deletes the limits on increases in impervious area within RPAs and RMAs. Potentially, this could provide more flexibility. Though in some localities it has led to the opposite1. |
| |
| Article 2 (Allowed Uses, Development and Redevelopment in Resource Protection Areas), has been changed such that section (b) now limits Redevelopment outside of IDAs [intensely developed areas] only if there is no increase in the amount of impervious cover and no further encroachment within the RPA. However, there are still no IDAs designated in Fairfax County and so the IDA provision is moot. |
| |
| Previously under Article 2, stormwater facilities that were constructed in RPAs had to be consistent with Fairfax County’s stormwater management program as approved by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Board (CBLAD), which limited such facilities to a short list of regional facilities previously approved by Fairfax County and CBLAD. This provision has been deleted and replaced with reference to “…a comprehensive stormwater management plan approved in accordance with 9 VAC 25-870-92 of the VSMP Permit Regulations” This may allow for the approval of additional regional facilities as these comprehensive plans are developed. |
| |
| Finally, Article 3 has been changed to remove the majority of 188-3-2 (e), which had limited the amount of phosphorus runoff from development and redevelopment. This section now references Chapter 124 of the County Code (the Stormwater Management Ordinance). This brings the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance up to date with the new stormwater requirements of this chapter. |
| |
| 1In Alexandria, the proposed demolition of a Big Box Retailer to allow for a hi-rise was not considered redevelopment because the change was "too extreme." |
