Rachel and Russell
Williams, Robert Gibson (King and Queen); Jack Miller, Thomas Jordan (Middlesex
County); Beth Locklear (VA Natural Heritage); Mike Anderberg (Friends of Dragon
Run); David Fuss (Middle Peninsula Planning District Commission)
David Fuss welcomed
everyone and offered a brief overview of the Special Area Management Plan
process up to this point. He distributed the final version of the Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) that the Dragon Run Steering Committee approved and passed
along to the Planning District Commission. He also distributed copies of a
matrix comparing county comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances for those who
did not already have a copy. He also solicited feedback about how the planning
process had worked in developing the goals and objectives in the MOA and asked
for suggestions on how to improve the process. The primary response was to
increase participation of other landowners, with specific attention paid to
those watershed landowners who do not live along the main channel of the
Dragon.
David asked the
group to review the goals and objectives in the MOA and to offer ideas about
how to achieve them.
Jack Miller noted that
the matrix clearly showed a difference in conservation zoning between counties.
Notably, Middlesex County has a Dragon Run Conservation District, while Essex
and King and Queen Counties have no conservation zoning (other than Bay Act
areas). Jack raised the specific issue of land application of biosolids,
expressing concern that: local government has no jurisdiction in this area;
state government lack of concern about the impacts to Dragon Run; inconsistency
between the Bay Act buffer (100 feet from stream) and the biosolids buffer
(much less); and concerns about human health and water quality.
There was further
discussion about the Bay Act and its 100 foot buffer. Mike Anderberg suggested
that a voluntary conservation zoning option could be employed by the counties
that would be consistent across county boundaries and could be used throughout
the watershed.
There was a brief
discussion about how well county zoning supported agriculture and forestry. It
was noted that commodity pricing is leading to larger (corporate) farms that
are highly mechanized and produce large volume. Smaller farms must raise
premium products (e.g. organic produce) to survive.
Concern was
expressed about the cost of providing water and sewer services to support
growing development. The source of adequate water was a particular concern and
there was discussion about the Steering Committee’s past effort to simulate the
construction of reservoir upstream from Saluda. Strong sentiment was expressed
against the idea of a reservoir in the Dragon Run. Discussion shifted to
mechanisms for preventing the construction of a reservoir. Conservation
easements might be one mechanism of preventing a reservoir. Mike Anderberg
noted that a Friends of Dragon Run easement could be overtaken through eminent
domain, but that a Virginia Outdoors Foundation easement was exempted from
state eminent domain (it could be overtaken by federal eminent domain).
Discussion then
focused on Goal I, Objective C that refers to monitoring of existing plans and
tools and assessing traditional uses and watershed health. Mike Anderberg felt
that it is incumbent upon the counties themselves to review the actions of
neighboring counties. Some possibilities for achieving this outcome are to use
the Steering Committee, the Planning District Commission, and the direct
county-to-county interaction. Doubts about the feasibility of county-to-county
review were raised. The ideal situation would be: a formal agreement (MOA?)
between counties to review major changes to major documents, such as comp
plans; facilitated by the PDC who would keep a timeline of when county comp
plan updates were to occur and alert other counties when the update process had
begun; establish a dialogue at the Planning Commission level to allow input from
the Steering Committee and other counties; and allow enough time for the Board
of Supervisors to address the issues adequately after the Planning Commission
had approved the updates. It was noted that CBLAD caused many changes to the
comp plans and making these changes before the deadline consumed much of the
time that the BOS should have had to address the issues thoroughly.
Finally, the topic
of education and awareness of the SAMP project was discussed. Newspapers are
one possible avenue, but they should be used with caution. For instance, when
the Steering Committee investigated the impacts of the creation of a reservoir
in the Dragon Run, the newspapers portrayed the Steering Committee and the PDC
as proponents of a reservoir, which was not the intention of the investigation.
Direct mailings to landowners is another method of disseminating information.
Mike Anderberg has developed a database of landowners fronting the Dragon Run
channel. He also noted that we needed to use a watershed-wide perspective when
reaching out to landowners. Discussion focused on taking an informational
presentation to existing groups (e.g. Farm Bureau, Extension Agents, Soil and
Water Conservation Districts).
David indicated
that he would prepare minutes from the meeting and alert the group to the next
meeting time in July. The meeting was adjourned.