Loudoun Wildlife Conservancy People and Wildlife Living in Harmony |
|---|
Loudoun's Zoning Ordinance
July 2007
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
“The seas are the heart's blood of the earth.” - Henry Beston |
Issue The Zoning Ordinance is the law which ensures that residents get what is envisioned in the County’s Comprehensive Plan - so it's important that we get it right! At present, the Loudoun County Comprehensive Plan calls for habitat and stream protections (River Stream Corridor Overlay District – RSCOD) that are missing from the proposed revisions to the Zoning Ordinance. Omitting environmental protections from the Zoning Ordinance or including revisions that allow bypass of protections means that our environment will be left without protection and we as citizens will have no recourse to save it. |
|
Why are key environmental protections that are called for by the Comprehensive Plan missing from the Zoning Ordinance? Other protective measures have also been removed from the Zoning Ordinance instead of taking steps to make them workable for the public and building industry. Conservation Design is one of these. This is a practice which requires that developers identify the valuable environmental features/resources on land they will develop so that it can be protected to the maximum extent possible. Environmentally sensitive design requirements should have been part of the Zoning Ordinance revisions. |
 This Heron Rookery in Ashburn is nesting site for over 80 Great Blue Herons - a real treasure. Changes to the Zoning Ordinance could threaten this rookery which abuts a large proposed development |
 Taking our public input out of the review process means our voices are silenced when it comes to protecting habitat |
Why allow existing rules for developers to be easily changed without public say, including safeguards for the public and the environment? Should regulations be moved from the legally binding Zoning Ordinance to the Facilities Standards Manual (FSM), where changes can be made administratively? One example would be moving floodplain regulations to the FSM. This would increase the potential for flooding, destruction, and loss of personal property. In particular, floodplain regulations have been changed to weaken them by moving them to the FMS. This increases the odds that natural floodplains will be destroyed. |
| Why include technical changes that would harm our water quality? Some of the changes would have a negative impact, including increasing the amount of impervious (paved) surfaces allowed for non-residential uses, increasing the size of some retail parking lots, and allowing buildings to cover more of the lot area. Has this been analyzed? |
 Impervious (paved) surfaces have far reaching impacts on our environment not only from the habitat that is lost but also from the pollution that collects on them that streams into our water supply |
 Protections are needed for habitats like vernal pools that serve as nurseries for a few months out of the year for countless frogs, toads and salamanders |
Why is unbuildable floodplain included in density calculations? Whether it is for residential or commercial development, increased density without corresponding environmental protections isn't in our best interest. |
| Why are buffering and screening requirements reduced or eliminated? Why loosen regulations that require retention of existing trees and vegetation in residential areas? If buffer yards are eliminated next to natural features, can the county require a forested stream buffer? |
 Without buffers, water runoff will erode our stream banks and chemical use will further degrade water quality |
Action We submitted our position to the Board of Supervisors and spoke at the public input session. Many members also sent emails directly to their Supervisors which helped empasize our environmental concerns. |
|