Chincoteague Reports

December 3, 2008 Accomack County Planning Commission Meeting

Metompkin Elementary School, Parksley, Virginia

Click here for Agenda materials and audio recording for this meeting, when available, can be found at

ATTENDANCE
Present: Phil Hickman, Chair,  Bob Hickman, James, Rhode, Nock, Turner, Thom.
Absent: Roberts
County Staff in Attendance: Jim McGowan, Director of Planning for Accomack County, and Mark Taylor, county attorney
Audience: There were approximately 30 attendees. 

Chairman Phil Hickman called the regular session to order at 7:00 PM.

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Ms. Kirkwood: She is concerned about stormwater ordinance and the necessary room needed for a septic system on a lot.  She stated stormwater ordinance is duplicated by Chesapeake Bay Act (CBA)

Mark Baumgarten (attny; representing local citizens).  Stormwater ordinance scientifically discusses flow of water.  He stated the amendment in regard to buildable amount on lot needs to be considered.   Exemptions dependent on lot size should be discussed. 

Audrey Lauder, New Church:  Her family put their land in conservation allotment.   She also wants to protect land on seaside of Accomack County.

Michael Inman (attny for Captain's Cove): He wanted to thank Planning Commission for looking into the vested rights of landowners when considering the CBA applied to seaside.  The seaside CBA issue would have impact on county.  He discussed the draft of amendments for small lot owners with respect to compliance to seaside CBA.  He would like a 30 to 60 day delay in having the Planning Commission giving their recommendations on applying seaside CBA.

Lois Cooper, Puncoteague: She is concerned for relax recommendations for lot owners on seaside when it comes to CBA.  The issue of having 25 ft away from waterway should be at least a minimal standard.  Any closer and insurance risks and storm damage will increase.

George Finlayson, Captain's Cove in Greenbackville:  He discussed some newspapers' accounts claiming those opposing seaside CBA were from Captain's Cove; he stated that only 15 people at  Public Hearing on seaside CBA  were from Captain's Cove.  He discussed the number of lots and depreciation that may occur from applying seaside CBA..

Billy Graham, Parkers Creek area: He is concerned about CBA ordinance and implication of acts.  He noted concerns about fines and regulations; he indicated he is somewhat unknowledgeable of rules of ordinances.  He would like Planning Commission to be better informed about ordinances and to explain them more clearly to local citizens.

Tanya (last name not stated): She discussed that there was no rush to have ordinances enacted.  She stated that the need for ordinances at this current time needed to be clearly known.

Public Comment period was stopped to have Public Hearing.

PUBLIC HEARING
Capitol Improvement Plan (CIP): A slideshow was given on CIP by county official.  Some of the projects discussed included school board projects, new burn building for fire training, south landfill closure, and additional POD at regional jail (long term project).

Other points made are that Accomack County has no dedicated funding stream for financing CIP projects.  Projects continue to stack on top of each other as their schedules are pushed back.  Projects were discussed for a three month period.  Planning Commission makes recommendations on CIP.

Public Hearing closed and a motion was made to approve recommendations made.  All were approved.

REOPEN PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Wanda Thornton, Chincoteague and Board of Supervisors (BOS) member for county: She was not at Public Hearing on seaside CBA.  She discussed individual lot owners' rights and she is not concerned with developers.  She made point of small lot owners who do not have 100 ft setback for Resource Protection Area (RPA).  She noted that memo on “vested rights” from Taylor (county attorney) was started by her and should had been sent to BOS and Panning Commission members.  She would like a forum to ask BOS and Planning Commission questions on seaside CBA.

Lance Stitcher, Captain's Cove: He briefly noted the issue of tax payers.  With new info, 58% of lots in question with respect to seaside CBA are in Captain's Cove.  He requested Planning Commission to work with attorneys to handle needs and exemptions of Captain's Cove lot owners.

CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

Drake Landing Rezoned: Jim McGowan gave recommendations on rezoning.  Motion to schedule public hearing on Drake Landing was approved.

Drive-In Theater: Tabled since owner was not present.

OLD BUSINESS

Subdivision issue still being considered.

Coal Kiln was reconsidered.

Konkel rezoning approved.

Draft Seaside CBA: Amendments were made for small lot owners.  Smaller water area on seaside will make higher impact when compared with Chesapeake Bay side with larger water volume.

Amendments suggested include small lot owners with less than 20K sq ft have a 35 ft setback from seaside.  For Captain's Cove due to smaller lots, they will be  given a 25 ft setback. Overall text amendments given to Planning Commission.  It was noted again to remove federal lands  from seaside CBA.  Captain's Cove will be designated as IDA (Intensely Developed Area) where areas comply with conditions.  Mr. McGowan asked Captain's Cove for info on sewer and has not received any info yet.

Bob Hickman asked why not include the bayside in variances.  He served on Zoning Board (ZB) and concerned about building ordinances around exemptions.  He led discussion on amount of square footage needed for house; he settled on 3500 sq ft.  Phil Hickman discussed the size and what will be recommended to BOS for action.

It was pointed out that BOS needed to make decision by August 29, 2009.

After discussion, it was decided to recommend  3500 sq ft.  If RPA encroachment was needed for 3500 sq ft building space, a 35 ft encroachment from seaside will be allowed requiring no further exemptions.  For lots in Captain's Cove a 25 ft encroachment will be allowed with no need for further exemptions.  IDA will be provided for.  Federal lands exempted.  The seaside CBA will be modified as recommended.  Motion to pass along amendments and ordinance recommendations to BOS was approved.

Draft Village Residential District Ordinance: It is still being reviewed.

Minutes of previous meeting were approved.

The meeting ended at 9:30 PM.

Notes by Tim Getek

N.B. These notes do not constitute the public record of this meeting. The information contained herein is offered in good faith and is presented as accurately as possible. These notes are intended to be a public service devoid of political commentary for those who are interested in following the civic affairs of Chincoteague Island and Accomack County. Notes of the meeting are recorded, transcribed and distributed by volunteers who receive no financial compensation for their efforts.

November 12, 2008 Joint Accomack County Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission

Public Hearing on Chesapeake Bay Applied to Seaside
(Atlantic Preservation Area Ordinance)

Metompkin Elementary School
Parksley, Virginia 
7 PM

Agenda materials and audio recording of this meeting may be found through this link:
Agenda materials & Audio Recording

ATTENDANCE
BOS Present: Philip Steve Mallette, Ron Wolff, Grayson Chessor, Sandra Mears, Laura Gordy,  D. Hart, S. McCaleb  Absent: Jack Gray, Wanda Thornton

Planning Commission Present: Phil Hickman, Bob Hickman, James, Rhode, Nock, Roberts, Turner, Thom. 

County Attendees: Jim McGowan, Director of Planning, Mr. Miner, County Manager, Mark Taylor, county attorney.

JOINT SESSION
BOS Chairman Ron Wolff called the joint session to order at 7:10 PM, Chair of Planning Commission Phil Hickman called the joint session to order at 7:10 PM.

Steve Malette made statement on potential conflict of interest.  He explained he did not believe his voting on Atlantic Preservation Area Ordinance (APAO) was a conflict even though he owns an environmental consultant firm in Accomack County.  He stated that his business in seaside areas of Accomack County is only a minimal part of his overall national business.

Ron Wolff read a statement from Wanda Thornton indicating she could not attend the Joint Session and she would like BOS to consider a delay on voting on the APAO.

Ron Wolff requested that future emails and letters with respect to hearings should be sent to the county administrator instead of individual BOS members so that communications can be compiled in a single place.  He stated that he received 20 emails on the APAO and ten were in favor to its approval and ten were opposed.

A presentation by James McGowan was given on APAO.  He presented a map on the Resource Protection Area (RPA) in Accomack County.  A discussion of the 100 ft RPA pointed the various zones from tidal areas and waterways.

He stated that the Code of Virginia authorizes local government to use zoning rules to protect water quality.  The APAO is supported by Objective 6 discussed in Accomack County Comprehensive Plan approved on May 14, 2008. 

It was also presented that water dependent uses are allowed in RPA including piers and docks.  Performance standards discussed included minimizing erosion and sediment as well as 5 year maintenance program for septic systems.  This septic maintenance may include the use of plastic filters forestalling the need for pumpout.

It was noted that compliance was not required for federal lands.  This included the national wildlife area, the national seashore and NASA.  James McGowan proposed that federal lands be exempt from APAO to avoid any potential conflict of federal land use.

James McGowan presented that the APAO will prevent costly legal challenges and is expressly authorized by the Code of Virginia.  The APAO protects water quality and aids in ecotourism as well as aquaculture.  He discussed situations of condemned clam beds and the need to improve the situation.

The need of rules and regulations outline in APAO was considered.  Voluntary efforts in the past were not effective when dealing with chicken farms and other agriculture practices.

Home owners concerns in Accomack County were addressed.  Nonconformity lots 51 ft to 100 ft from seaside need only an administrative exemption to build.  Those areas within the seaside first 50 ft will require a board of zoning (BZ) exemption.

For already developed areas such as Captain’s Cove in Greenbackville area, other definitions can be applied such as Intensely Developed Areas (IDA) which may give some relief to home and lot owners that have one quarter acre lots.

Shawn Smith of the Chesapeake Bay Act assistance division was ill and could not make session.

The next presenter was Mark Luckenback of VIMS (Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences). He discussed land use in a riparian environment.  It was noted that primary degradation follows population patterns.  There is a general trend of increased degradation along the Delmarva coast from the south to north where there are greater population centers in the northern part. 

One variable examined was water flushing of land masses into the waterways.  Average water flushing in various areas was studied.  In Tom’s cove on Assateague Island, the flush period is approximately 4.5 days.  The typical resonant time in Virginia’s coastal areas is a couple of weeks.  One concern is water runoff from various types of land areas such as farms, forests, and house lots.  It was found for a quarter acre house lot the average rain runoff was 43% compared to a one acre house lot with a value of 30%.

Mark Luckenback discussed the major findings.  Nitrogen, phosphorus, and fecal coli were positively correlated with impervious land cover.  The greater amount of the contaminants, the greater amount of impervious land cover.  There were some exceptions, and these occurred when a creek bed ran through a forested area prior to emptying into the bay.

His closing points were shallow coastal systems are stressed and this can be aided by good management of land areas.

PUBLIC HEARING
At this time, signed up speakers were requested to give their views on the APAO.  Many persons spoke, but their views can be encapsulated into three major categories: 1) Those approving of the APAO, 2) those in favor of the concept and spirit of the APAO but require amending and modification of the ordinance, and 3) those opposed to the APAO.

Approve of APAO: Some of the key people and topics voiced were Steve Parker of The Nature Conservancy.  He stated that there was a need to preserve the natural balance of the animals and plants around the local waterways.  The APAO will allow this to occur and protect the natural balance.  Another speaker discussed the need to preserve and protect drinking water and the APAO will aid in this protection.  One key topic was clam farming.  Several speakers voiced concern about observed degradation of clam beds and the need not only to preserve what remains of good clam beds but attempt to bring contaminated beds to economic viability.  Degradation of coastal waters was noted by increase in what is known as sourweed over the past decade.  It was pointed out that the watershed of ocean coastal Virginia had no major rivers flowing into the ocean.  Accomack County has essentially complete control of any outflow that may impact these waters.  The director of the Eastern Shorekeepers spoke and indicated its 300 members embraces the APAO for what it can do to preserve the coastal areas.  Other speakers pointed out that in the long run adoption of APAO will help the economics of the Eastern Shore.

For APAO Concept but with Modifications and Amendments: Many at the session voiced that they are for cleaner water and improving the environment, but they have concerns about how the APAO is currently written.  A continuing theme was the personal economic impact that may occur on a homeowner or lot owner who attempts to sell or buy their property.  Along with a potential of a devaluation of homes and lots, the APAO would impact the revenue stream of Accomack county which depends highly on the funds collected from assessments of property.  In addition with the lost county revenue, there may be lawsuits filed against the county due to the “vested rights” of property owners and the “taking” of land through enacting the APAO.  One speaker pointed out that the article describing the APAO in the Eastern Shore newspaper did not give a clear indication of the regulations and rules that may be imposed on land owners that could cause undue hardships.  Another speaker described his experience on the bayside which is currently under the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance.  Due to the RPA, he is not able to use his small lot completely.  This resulted in an uncompensated taking of land, and furthermore, he did not receive any variance in tax structure even though he could not use his land in the manner he wanted.

Oppose to APAO: Several speakers opposed the APAO based on economics and the current difficult fiscal situation in the county and state.  In addition, the point was made by some that there are current state and federal laws that will take care of the environmental concerns, and that there is no need to burden local citizens with more governmental regulations.  One key speaker was Lance Stitcher, General Manager of Captain’s Cove Golf and Yacht Club.  He discuss the potential devaluation of 4900 lots in Captain’s Cove and the revenue impact on Accomack County.  He then requested of Ron Wolff if he could ask for a show of hands of those in the audience opposed to APAO.  Permission was granted, and over two-thirds of audience raised their hand in opposition to APAO.  Other concerns expressed by speakers were the current status of the ordinance on the Chesapeake Bay side of county.  It was discussed that there had been minimal environmental improvement by following this ordinance in this area.  Some speakers indicated that the major concentration of potential pollution and runoff were large towns, and incorporated towns are excluded from the APAO. 

JOINTS SESSION CHAIRS:
A motion was made by the chair of the Planning Commission to delay voting on APAO until after the work session of the Planning Commission on Monday, November 17.  Mark Taylor concurred that this was feasible, and motion was approved to delay vote on APAO until further study.

Meeting ended at approximately 11 PM

Notes by Tim Getek

N.B. These notes do not constitute the public record of this meeting. The information contained herein is offered in good faith and is presented as accurately as possible. These notes are intended to be a public service devoid of political commentary for those who are interested in following the civic affairs of Chincoteague Island and Accomack County.. Notes of the meeting are recorded, transcribed and distributed by volunteers who receive no financial compensation for their efforts.

September 16, 2008 Accomack County Planning Commission Work Session

Metompkin Elementary School, Parksley, Virginia

No agenda materials and no audio recording for this work session are available at this time.  An audio recording may be uploaded at a later date.  Click here to listen.  A brief agenda is available.  Click here to read.

ATTENDANCE
Present: Phil Hickman [Chair],Stella Rhode [Vice Chair], Robert Hickman, Tammy James,  Robert L. Nock. 
Absent: Leander Roberts,  Herbert A. Thom, E. Bryan Turner

Audience: There were approximately 15 attendees.  Jim McGowan, Director of Planning for Accomack County, and Mark Taylor, county attorney were also in attendance.

Chairman Phil Hickman called the regular session to order at 7:00 PM.

AGENDA: This work session was called to discuss the application of the Chesapeake Bay Act (CBA) to the seaside areas in Accomack County.  Note in Accomack county the CBA already applies to the bayside (Chesapeake-side) of county.  A draft ordinance will be reviewed and scheduling a joint public hearing will be planned.  There was no public comment for this work session.

DISSCUSION:
Jim McGowan explained various terms and portions of draft CBA for seaside areas. The proposed area encompassed by the CBA includes tidal flows, streams, and rivers within a 100 foot buffer of waterways and wetlands.  This area is described as the Resource Protection Area (RPA).

At this time, small lot owners and large land owners are expected to comply if within the RPA.  For single homes, a description of the RPA (if applicable) is required by a sketch and a description of an erosion plan.  The county officials will assist a single home owner with these details.  For a development, a more detailed plan is expected for compliance with the CBA.  A suitable engineer should be hired by a development to make sure they are in compliance with the CBA.

For homes, a reserve drain field will be required, unless the lot is unable to comply with CBA due to size or other limitations.  Variances for compliance were described as “administration exemptions”.

A current home will need to provide county with a sketch and erosion plan if an add-on is built that may encroach upon the RPA.  Again, county officials will help the home owner with their plans.

In general for home owners, a 50 foot encroachment into the RPA can be approved as an administration exemption; encroachment inside 50 foot requires approval by the Board of Zoning (BZ) which will need to investigate potential impact on the RPA.

In general, dock, piers, and bulkheads are okay inside RPA; however, backfill of these areas should use suitable natural plants and vegetation.  A pathway to a dock or pier is okay according to CBA.

For farmers, compliance to good farm practices will be the determining factor on how much encroachment into the RPA will be allowed.  Non-compliance to CBA can impact funding to farmers by federal agencies.  Compliance can be verified by aerial photographs and inspecting boundaries of the RPA.  Phil Hickman stated that farmers comply with the bayside CBA currently at a 95% rate due to the funding issues involved.

At this time, there was a 15 minute recess for the commission to review county maps and overlays that show the RPAs in various districts.

Due to the nature of CBA, only one administration exemption will be allowed for each home or area.  Other requested variances will go to BZ.

Mark Taylor indicated for sake of simplicity, it would be best that the seaside CBA will have similar rules as the bayside CBA.  If during the course of reviewing and approving seaside CBA there are changes in seaside CBA then similar changes should be made to bayside CBA to minimize confusion.  Phil Hickman agreed to this concept.

PLANNED JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
Hearing is planned for November 12.  Funding for mailing information was obtained from DEQ at a funding level of $12.5K.  It is important to note that the current proposed seaside CBA is a draft and changes could be made that are less restrictive.  Changes cannot be made that are more restrictive at this time.  Citizens can contact their county officials for comments and suggestions.  A draft version of ordinance is on county website attached to September 3 Planning Commission meeting.  See the draft listed in the September 3 meeting.

The work session ended at 8:30 PM.

Notes by Tim Getek

N.B. These notes do not constitute the public record of this meeting. The information contained herein is offered in good faith and is presented as accurately as possible. These notes are intended to be a public service devoid of political commentary for those who are interested in following the civic affairs of Chincoteague Island. Notes of the meeting are recorded, transcribed and distributed by volunteers who receive no financial compensation for their efforts.