Planned changes to local preservation guidelines have some local officials concerned about needless bureaucracy as well as loopholes for developers.
Several members of the county’s Park and Recreation Commission voiced skepticism after they received a briefing on proposed changes slated for Arlington County Board consideration in June.
“A lot of it feels like people making changes to say they made some changes that feel good,” Commissioner Andrew Damitio at the April 8 meeting. “I don’t think [the revised rules] provide a conservation benefit, because they make it more difficult to perform any kind of conservation activities.”
He raised particular concerns about planned requirement changes in designated resource-protection areas.
The revamped regulations would require county review and approval before removing dead trees or “noxious vegetation,” said Christin Jolicoeur, a senior watershed projects manager for the county. That even includes plants like poison ivy, which is considered “noxious” but is not invasive.
Commission Chair Jill Barker said her committee will look into the issues that Damitio raised, and possibly could pen a letter to Board members before the matter goes to a vote.
Commission members won’t make any decisions until next month, after they take a closer look at any potential downsides to the ordinance changes.
Barker said she wouldn’t want any changes to make it harder to remove, for instance, invasive plants.
“If it does have that effect, I would want to say something. I’m just not sure it does have that effect,” she said.
As for tree-removal requirements, “there has always been a review process,” Jolicoeur told commission members.
“We do that by email. It’s pretty straightforward,” she said.
The amended provisions would require documentation that a tree is dead or diseased before the county approves it for removal.
It isn’t just some Park and Recreation Commission members that have concerns about the revamped rules under consideration. Adding diseased trees to the ranks of those that can be removed from properties has concerned the county’s urban forestry staff, Jolicoeur said.
“Our urban forester has said almost every tree has some kind of disease,” she said.
Allowing for the removal of any tree designated as diseased might provide a loophole for developers to exploit, several on the parks panel feared.
The net effect could be “giving people who perhaps do not have the Chesapeake Bay’s best interests at heart an avenue in which to remove all or most of the trees on the property, and do it as cheaply as possible,” commission member Alex Sanders said.
The proposed amendments are a response to legislation passed in the 2020 General Assembly session and regulations adopted by the Soil and Water Conservation Board, meant to blunt harm to the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
Localities have until September to update their policies.
