Dear Members of the Committee, As one of your constituents, I wanted to convey my support for the many tree related bills in front of the committee. These specific Bills will allow localities to more effectively conserve existing trees and maintain newly planted trees. Conserving and increasing Virginia’s tree canopy is critical not only because trees are beautiful, but because they also provide the following crucial benefits: - Reduce flooding - Stormwater runoff reduction - Less heat islands, which leads to reduced energy costs and healthier citizens - Improve air quality and reduce air pollution - Sequester carbon All of these benefits create a win – win – win by helping the environment, improving human health, and providing cost effective positive economic impacts. I hope that you all recognize the critical benefits that trees provide across the state of Virginia and that you will support these bills. Sincerely, Winston Bibee

Comments Document

I am Denise Mosca, a constituent of Keith Hodges in Gloucester County, living at 6977 Ark Road. Please allow HB 529 and HB1100 to pass out of committee to be considered by the House. Because Virginia is a Dillon Rule state, localities need to be granted the flexibility to manage trees specific to their local planning and individual stormwater response. In a 2020 study Virginia Dept. of Forestry VADOF estimated that Virginia is currently losing 14,000 acres annually to land conversion. From 2014 to 2018 Gloucester County has experienced a net loss of 217 acres of tree cover. The 2020 VADOF study delineated the following benefits of trees (see attachment): Trees are a low cost option to provide resilience. Keeping healthy, mature trees on site costs far less than taxpayer-funded programs to construct “hard” storm water infrastructure. HB 529 and HB1100 are local option bills; they provide the freedom to the locality to enact the provisions or not. There is a site specific clause for deviation in HB 529 to address hardship of the developer provided that neighborhood stormwater management and tree preservation goals are considered. Fairfax County has adopted this ordinance package as of 2009 and it has neither slowed nor hindered development or stifled affordable housing initiatives. Virginia has already delegated authority to the localities to implement stormwater plans that make the most sense for their circumstances. Please allow localities the low cost options to maintain and increase tree cover for their stormwater planning and all the benefits that trees provide for Virginia.

Please support HB644.

Please support HB170! This proposal would extend local authority throughout Virginia to preserve tree canopy, improve local water quality, reduce flooding and mitigate the impact of climate change. Land development and tree removal continue to progress in Virginia at an alarming rate. This bill would help Virginia to meet its tree canopy goals.

HB170 Trees; conservation during land development process - This bill should become law. Virginia is far behind in meeting its urban tree canopy goals under the Chesapeake Bay Agreement. Tree canopy loss must be reversed.

Support HB170. Virginia continues to lose tree canopy at an astounding rate, which limits the state’s ability to improve water quality, reduce flooding and mitigate the impact of climate change on the most vulnerable communities. Climate-ready communities that are resilient to flash floods, urban heat islands and increased air pollution need trees

Please support bills HB 170 and HB 459. Virginia continues to lose tree canopy amazingly fast, which hurts our ability to improve water quality, decrease flooding and mitigate heat and air quality effects of climate change. Virginia has signed onto The Bay Agreement and is far behind in meeting its urban tree canopy goals. HB 170 includes canopy credits for saving high-value mature trees and tree stands to incentivize preservation and has a minimum post-construction canopy coverage percentage and would cover the whole state rather than just northern Virginia. HB 459 would further strengthen the current "conservation during land development process".

Richmond needs the ability and authority to conserve its trees during the development process as we work to restore and protect our tree canopy in our most vulnerable communities, Please support this bill!

I am president of Richmond Tree Stewards, a volunteer organization dedicated to the support of our urban canopy. We endorse this legislation for all of the health, ecological, economic and social benefits outlined by other supporters. Localities already have certain tools at their disposal that allow them to establish or preserve the character of a given neighborhood or development via architectural, historic preservation, and zoning requirements. These ordinances regulate such factors as building height, setback, materials, rooflines, porches and facades, sidewalks, lighting, parking, etc. because they effect the community or neighborhood as a whole. Trees, whether on private or public property, have a fundamental and positive impact on the character of a community. For this reason, localities should have the authority to consider tree canopy and preservation when evaluating proposed development. Here in Richmond, many of the largest, oldest, and healthiest trees on our city blocks are located on private property, both commercial and residential. I have noted privately-owned trees that shade or partially shade as many as 19 surrounding homes. Few street trees--planted in our small city tree wells, subjected to pollution, road salt, compacted soil, excrement, utility lines, vehicle damage, and other indignities--will ever reach these proportions. The loss of one such tree can create a void that will last decades. H.B. 170 is a logical and necessary tool for localities to seek a balance between their natural and built environment. We ask your support.

Comments Document

TO: Members, Virginia House Counties Cities and Towns - Subcommittee #2 FROM: Virginia League of Conservation Voters DATE: January 18, 2024 RE: Virginia LCV Legislative Positions – HB 170, HB 459 On January 18, the House Commerce and Energy Committee will consider the following legislation: HB170 and HB459. We encourage you to SUPPORT HB170 and HB459 HB170 (Keys-Gamarra) Trees; conservation during land development process. This legislation would: Allow all localities in Virginia to adopt tree conservation and preservation ordinances–currently, only cities in Planning District 8 are allowed to do so. Reasons to SUPPORT HB170: Virginia localities must have the authority to conserve existing canopy where possible and replant where it’s not feasible to keep the trees on site in order to prepare our communities for the impacts of climate change Climate-ready communities that are resilient to flash floods, urban heat islands and increased air pollution need trees in their toolbox as a cost-effective strategy to deploy. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ HB459 (Sullivan) Trees; conservation during land development process in certain localities. This legislation would: Strengthen tree conservation by adding incentives to preserve stands of healthy mature trees and expand how certain localities can use their tree fund. Increase the canopy credits a developer receives if they preserve high-value mature trees or stands of trees. Developers who provide a stand assessment prior to submitting a site plan and who take the necessary precautions to protect those trees during construction would receive additional canopy credit Allow a locality to plant on both public AND private property and use funds to help maintain newly planted trees. Reasons to SUPPORT HB170: Virginia continues to lose tree canopy–limiting the Commonwealth’s ability to improve water quality, reduce flooding and mitigate the impact of climate change. Virginia is far behind in meeting its urban tree canopy goals under the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement. If you have any questions about our position, please contact Michael Town, Executive Director of Virginia LCV, at mtown@valcv.org, or Chris Leyen, Policy Director, at cleyen@valcv.org, or 925-354-1433 (mobile).

Please Support! The preservation of trees here has to do with where the trees are in relation to the buildable area of a parcel based on zoning requirements, so it's appropriate that it be regulated by the Zoning Ordinance. If passed this legislation will provide an additional tool for resiliency and enhanced stormwater management. Enforcement for violations should be through stormwater or some other environmental regulation instead of the Zoning Ordinance. The City of Portsmouth strongly supports this bill.

Fairfax Tree Stewards (FTS) is a Virginia non-profit corporation that preserves, plants, and maintains trees in Fairfax County and vicinity, educates the public on the value and benefits of trees, and encourages them to take an active role in caring for trees. We speak for the trees because the trees cannot speak for themselves. It is critical to do more to preserve and increase Virginia’s tree canopy. Virginia has signed on to the Bay Agreement, but it is far behind in meeting its urban tree canopy goals. It is altogether unacceptable that Virginia continues to lose tree canopy at an astounding rate, which limits the state’s ability to improve water quality, reduce flooding and mitigate the impact of climate change on the most vulnerable communities. A healthy urban tree canopy reduces flooding, cools our cities, encourages people to walk, reduces air pollution, and alleviates stress and asthma. FTS urges the Subcommittee to report out HB170. The bill will help to preserve and increase Virginia’s tree canopy by allowing localities throughout the commonwealth to adopt an ordinance providing for the conservation of trees during the land development process. Currently, only localities in Planning District 8 (Northern Virginia) that meet specific requirements can do so. The bill will establish minimum post-construction canopy coverage percentages, which could be achieved by preserving existing trees or by planting new ones. It also allows localities to establish a tree canopy fund that developers pay into if it is not feasible to achieve the target canopy percentages on site. It also establishes a framework of canopy credits for high-value mature trees or stands of trees to incentivize preservation.

Please support HB459 and SB121. Preserving tree canopy is especially vital during this time of climate chaos. Trees protect us from heat, provide protections from flooding, air pollution, and provide habitat for more than songbirds. It is important that developing communities have access to funding and flexibility to preserve old trees. (Studies have shown lower violence rates in treed communities; they give us a sense of peace and belonging.) Trees limit asthma impacts by cleaning air. We all need increased incentives to preserve trees. (Sadly, researchers report we are 50 years behind in our hardwood tree growing in Virginia, due to invasives, lack of periodic fires, and deer browse). Thus, preserving them & planting becomes even more important. Thank you.

Please support both HB170 and HB459 which both promote tree conservation during development. Preserving existing trees is critical for improving air water quality, mitigating flooding, reducing urban heat, and promoting citizen mental health and safety. Virginia is rapidly losing trees to development and is failing to meet goals relating to the Bay Agreement. These bills would benefit Virginians in numerous ways and would help us meet goals we have set.

Please help localities address blight by supporting HB 301. Communities need additional tools to move forward and protect the public interest by repairing or removing such structures that are in poor condition. Further enhancement of current state level laws will better serve citizens of cities and towns across the Commonwealth.

HB405 Please leave the decision on Solar Farms to the locality it’s proposed to be placed. The loss of agriculture and trees is a danger to the environment and fiscal health of the location and therefore the residents should have the final say. Studies of long term land pollution should be made available to all citizens in a manner that reaches a large portion of the state

The City of Portsmouth has reviewed and supports this bill, although it's only an optional inclusion, However, we do not think it should not still include a density requirement.

Dear Members of the Committee, As one of your constituents, I wanted to convey my support for the many tree related bills in front of the committee. These specific Bills will allow localities to more effectively conserve existing trees and maintain newly planted trees. Conserving and increasing Virginia’s tree canopy is critical not only because trees are beautiful, but because they also provide the following crucial benefits: - Reduce flooding - Stormwater runoff reduction - Less heat islands, which leads to reduced energy costs and healthier citizens - Improve air quality and reduce air pollution - Sequester carbon All of these benefits create a win – win – win by helping the environment, improving human health, and providing cost effective positive economic impacts. I hope that you all recognize the critical benefits that trees provide across the state of Virginia and that you will support these bills. Sincerely, Winston Bibee

Comments Document

I am Denise Mosca, a constituent of Keith Hodges in Gloucester County, living at 6977 Ark Road. Please allow HB 529 and HB1100 to pass out of committee to be considered by the House. Because Virginia is a Dillon Rule state, localities need to be granted the flexibility to manage trees specific to their local planning and individual stormwater response. In a 2020 study Virginia Dept. of Forestry VADOF estimated that Virginia is currently losing 14,000 acres annually to land conversion. From 2014 to 2018 Gloucester County has experienced a net loss of 217 acres of tree cover. The 2020 VADOF study delineated the following benefits of trees (see attachment): Trees are a low cost option to provide resilience. Keeping healthy, mature trees on site costs far less than taxpayer-funded programs to construct “hard” storm water infrastructure. HB 529 and HB1100 are local option bills; they provide the freedom to the locality to enact the provisions or not. There is a site specific clause for deviation in HB 529 to address hardship of the developer provided that neighborhood stormwater management and tree preservation goals are considered. Fairfax County has adopted this ordinance package as of 2009 and it has neither slowed nor hindered development or stifled affordable housing initiatives. Virginia has already delegated authority to the localities to implement stormwater plans that make the most sense for their circumstances. Please allow localities the low cost options to maintain and increase tree cover for their stormwater planning and all the benefits that trees provide for Virginia.

Please support HB529

Support HB459; too many trees are being cut down in our neighborhood, causing higher temperatures and more flooding. Trees mitigate these issues, provide shade, and reduce stress. We can't afford to lose them.

HB529 - The Arlington Tree Action Group (a group of 500+ Arlington residents concerned about tree canopy in Arlington) heartily endorses this bill being presented by Delegate Hope. It is critical that the county of Arlington, a county with very high density, have the flexibility to better control their tree canopy preservation. This bill will allow the county more flexibility to regulate tree conservation and planting, given the large zoning changes across the county in 2023 - namely Expanded Housing Options. Thank you.

Comments Document

I am Denise Mosca, a constituent of Keith Hodges in Gloucester County, living at 6977 Ark Road. Please allow HB 529 and HB1100 to pass out of committee to be considered by the House. Because Virginia is a Dillon Rule state, localities need to be granted the flexibility to manage trees specific to their local planning and individual stormwater response. In a 2020 study Virginia Dept. of Forestry VADOF estimated that Virginia is currently losing 14,000 acres annually to land conversion. From 2014 to 2018 Gloucester County has experienced a net loss of 217 acres of tree cover. The 2020 VADOF study delineated the following benefits of trees (see attachment): Trees are a low cost option to provide resilience. Keeping healthy, mature trees on site costs far less than taxpayer-funded programs to construct “hard” storm water infrastructure. HB 529 and HB1100 are local option bills; they provide the freedom to the locality to enact the provisions or not. There is a site specific clause for deviation in HB 529 to address hardship of the developer provided that neighborhood stormwater management and tree preservation goals are considered. Fairfax County has adopted this ordinance package as of 2009 and it has neither slowed nor hindered development or stifled affordable housing initiatives. Virginia has already delegated authority to the localities to implement stormwater plans that make the most sense for their circumstances. Please allow localities the low cost options to maintain and increase tree cover for their stormwater planning and all the benefits that trees provide for Virginia.

Oppose bill: The last thing we need is electric vehicles. -batteries are mined in Africa that promotes child labor -Unaffordable and dangerous fire hazard -Do not stand the cold weather

Please support HB644

HB567 provides a common-sense solution to ensure that Virginia has a sustainable future. EV charging stations in large residential or commercial settings would encourage EV usage and provide Virginians a convenient place to charge where they live and shop.

Please support HB567. Electric vehicles are a way forward for our communities, and we will all need to be able to charge them. This would allow a simpler transition and far less confusion. It is perfectly reasonable for the density proposed to assume a fleet of vehicles could more easily serve commercial needs as well. Thank you--such planning is best done ahead.

This green new deal is not green. Have you done any research at all to see what the down side of these things are? I feel everything should be left to our county to make decisions on our area. Period. The over research is sicking and it is time to sit down and do some real research. It's Time to put the brakes on such overreach of authority. Leave the counties alone. We are not socialism, U.S.A. these solar panels cause behavioral problems in children! You are not to live 1.3 miles from a solar ( industrial) farm. The land canot be used for up to 30 years after solar farm has been on the land. It causes soil erosion. It displaces/ kills animals! You are not to put close to wetlands ,streams,etc. And these that are already put in are on top of them! it can cause damage to water quality and possible contamination - ecological disasters uncontrolled runoff of water and topsoil is a well documented by product of industrial scale solar site. This is straight from research. No one is following rules and solar is not by far a green new deal. Use your thinking cap,research! Research!. Why would you want to put citizens in harms way???? Children especially. Do you even care? Do you have a heart? There is so much more that these solar farms cause!! Take the time , act like you have a brain and totally refrain from taking the authority away from the counties. Solar produces more toxic waste per unit of energy than does nuclear energy. This is a very serious ,serious thing that needs more and more research. Experts say the not green deal will cause more problems than it resolves. And that's experts.. please totally refrain from your egregious over reach.

I believe this is overreach. Localities should have the right to make all decisions regarding things like large solar arrays based on individual and unique geography, needs, and circumstances. We have fought hard to keep Big Solar out of our county. For lawmakers in Richmond (many who have never even been here) to undermine said work would be tragic. Thank you, Eric R. Smith

I ask that these bills be thrown out. They are a state government overreach because they remove the ability of local government to govern their communities through existing planning and zoning in the siting of energy facilities. They also overrule local moratoriums which have been put in place to control the real impacts of these facilities on concerned communities.

I signed up to speak and received confirmation, but no link this morning. I'm a good-government advocate from Petersburg and strongly support this bill. Petersburg STILL needs this early warning system. Our city leadership believes that having accumulated a healthy cash balance means AAA fiscal management. Rather, we have 10 recurring material weakness findings in our latest ACFR, FY 2022 -- we're late (as usual) for FY 2023 submission. 5 of those material weakness in internal controls findings have recurred for 7 years. The city lacks the in-house ability to prepare up-to-date financial reconciliations -- so we are flying blind, until our paid accounting and auditing consultants untangle it for us. When I was budget director at VDH and VITA, material weaknesses, particularly recurring ones, were a real big no-no. Localities need to have the same healthy fear of adverse ACFR findings.

Good Morning Everyone, My name is Johnny Partin, and I am the Mayor for the City of Hopewell. Today I am speaking as 1 of 2 members on our city council that support this legislation. Our city can trace its problems back to approximately 2015. Had legislation like this been passed and in place back then, our present situation in the city would have been prevented. These issues and problems would have been addressed and fixed back in 2017 before I even got elected to city council. But we are here today addressing local governments experiencing fiscal distress. You all are in a great position to prevent what is currently happening in Hopewell from other localities across the Commonwealth. You all are in a great position to protect the financial health of all localities and improve the Commonwealth's, and lastly you are in a great position to protect our citizens and improve their quality of life. I urge you all to support this bill. You may not have a community in your district that is in fiscal distress today, but you may one day. No community is immune from fiscal distress. And wouldn't it be great to have a safeguard like this legislation in place to protect the citizens and get the community the help it needs. Thank you Johnny Partin

I am submitting the following comments on the proposed HB655. Through my 25+ years in closely following Hopewell government, coupled with my 45 years in Banking, and my recent four years on Hopewell City Council, I would like to say that while I am not totally opposed to this bill, I believe that the State's early intervention to help localities is much more critical than takeover should ever be. Coming in and having to take over a locality should not be the state's agenda unless absolutely necessary and then done so working with the locality to build for a sustainable future. The recognition a locality has an issue must start in the process much earlier to help review and assist that locality. The audit process is in place for that very reason and the state is not utilizing it to the ability I believe they should. As a Banker, I must adhere to strict audits from both the Federal and State levels, or risk penalties. The safety of taxpayer's dollars is paramount. Banks are audited on many aspects and are required to pass those audits. Why would the state allow even one annual audit to go past due without questions or one financial portion of an APA audit to fail without having a presence in the locality to follow up and work with the locality? Approximately, five to six years ago, our elected Treasurer at the time, failed APA audits. I called the APA Director myself to ask what was being done with regards to our failed audits and her response was that the APA did not have the schedule nor the staff to come back in to follow up. When localities transact with millions of local taxpayers' dollars and they cannot pass APA audits, and APA does not step in for discovery at that time because of staff and scheduling shortages, that makes NO sense and is wrong. Why do the audits? This is exactly where some of the initial emphasis needs to be placed. Audits, both by APA and outside firms, are only as good as the state's follow up on the audit's content and findings allows them to be! Hopewell is the poster child of how a new accounting system implemented poorly, can negatively impact everything and when of audits are not completed for years! Doesn't mean takeover should be immanent. The second issue I have is allowing elected Treasurers to have no knowledge and experience criteria required for election. I spoke with both Deputy Finance Director John Markowitz and Delegate Coyner about this issue last year. I do not know that either have any plans to suggest to the state that these criteria might be helpful to our localities, so I will. I do not understand why the State would allow anyone to be elected to a local Treasurer position with no knowledge of accounting or finance! Treasurers are independent of the locality authority as an elected official. Someone handling millions of dollars of taxpayer's money should have at least a basic knowledge of accounting or municipal accounting. As a citizen of Virginia, that is what I want. Would you let a Commonwealth's Attorney be elected without a law degree? Knowledge and experience is important for local financial health. It is time to focus attention to the issues to help localities early in the process and not threaten a takeover which ultimately benefits no one. Set up standards for audits and the process. Review and assist localities as soon as they fail an audit or get behind. Do not wait for years to pass.

The Rappahannock Rapidan Regional Commission is supportive of HB 725, as we believe it will allow us to be customer/citizen service-focused without sacrificing necessary transparency. The current requirement of local governments in this Code section is to tell citizens seeking a residential only utility service easement across local government-owned property that they must wait 30-days to get electric service, for example, so that a public hearing can be held. HB 725 would apply very narrowly to utility easements for a residential property adjacent to property owned by the locality. As mentioned, the current Code section requires the holding of a public hearing for any public or private sale, exchange, lease as lessor, mortgage, pledge, subordinate interest in or otherwise disposal of real property. There are currently some very reasonable exceptions to the holding of a public hearing including (i) the leasing of real property to another public body, political subdivision or authority of the Commonwealth; (ii) conveyance of site development easements, or utility easements related to transportation projects, across public property, including easements for ingress, egress, utilities, cable, telecommunications, storm water management and other similar conveyances. For Orange County, and other local governments, it would seem that providing an exception to the public hearing process when it is a routine easement request for residential utility service that happens to involve local government property, is a reasonable accommodation in order to provide more timely service to citizens seeking residential utility services. The public hearing requirement in this instance does not advance the public interest, but rather adds delay to providing residential taxpayer’s utility service.

I oppose this bill although the Town of Cape Charles, by ordinance, allows ADUs by-right. We want ADUs to allow for a greater diversification of affordable housing stock. Inserting language in the state code regarding 'no locality shall require compliance with any other requirements except as provided in this section' is a problem. First it is an erosion of local government control. Second it limits the locality to tailor ADU criteria without tailoring requirements to the locality (e.g., min lot size, requirement for separate trash receptacles, or any setback requirements regarding accessory structures to name a few). Allowing an ADU up to 1500 SF is like allowing another SF dwelling unit on the lot. Cape Charles limits ADUs not to exceed 45% of floor area of main building which typically results in a one bedroom sized housing unit. That is fine with us given our housing density. Eliminating dedicated parking is a show-stopper for us. With our historic district lots being 40'x140', we currently have a street parking problem given all our STRs. Our ordinance requires off-street parking. Erosion of a locality's control over ADUs should be enough to kill this bill.

NVBCL supports local authority for Virginia Beach, and all localities in Virginia, to regulate land use (zoning) and planning, including local determination for compatible uses of property in each district (e.g. residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural). So we advocate for the General Assembly to give Virginia Beach MORE authority, not less, to enact and enforce local ordinances for land use and planning. We are in direct communication with Citu Councilman Worth Remick, Commissioner of Revenue Phil Kellam, Senator Bill DeSteph, Delegate Anne Tata, and others about our concerns. We oppose this bill because it requires Virginia Beach to allow ADUs in every residential district, without permits or conditions, such as requiring adequate parking, water, or sewer capacity.

Comments Document

(Please see our attached letter for a more readable formatting of our exceptions to this bill.) The North Virginia Beach Civic League (NVBCL) requests the following modifications to resolve our exception to this bills: 1. Modify paragraph B to give localities authority to determine whether and where ADUs shall be a permitted use, whether to require a special use permit for an ADU, and how zoning ordinances, building codes, or other requirements shall apply to ADUs. 2. Modify paragraph C to allow localities to determine the amount of permit fees for ADUs, and to determine the zoning ordinances, building codes, and other requirements that will apply to ADUs. Localities need authority to regulate ADU as appropriate and applicable to the circumstances and needs of their communities. 3. In paragraph D.6, include “local zoning ordinances” in the list of requirements that localities may require. 4. Delete paragraph E.1. Conditions and capacities for parking vary across localities, and across neighborhoods within localities. Localities must retain authority to determine parking requirements that apply to ADUs. 5. Move paragraph E.2 to subsection D, removing it from the list of what localities shall NOT require, and adding it to the list of what localities MAY require. Localities must have authority to determine lot sizes and setbacks as applicable to conditions and needs of localities and neighborhoods. 6. Move paragraph E.4 to subsection D, removing it from the list of what localities shall NOT require, and adding it to the list of what localities MAY require. Localities must retain the authority to manage water, sewer, and septic capacity. Thank you

HB 900 -- STRONGLY OPPOSE any action by the Virginia General Assembly that would: • Compel localities to allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), or • Limit the ability of localities to regulate ADUs, • Override local authority for ADU zoning, land use or planning. I support the process in Virginia Beach that is currently underway to draft ADU ordinances, encourage the Virginia General Assembly to give localities MORE authority, not less, to draft and enforce ordinances regarding ADUs.

Comments Document

The North Virginia Beach Civic League (NVBCL), STRONGLY OPPOSES any action by the Virginia General Assembly that would: • Compel localities to allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), or • Limit the ability of localities to regulate ADUs, • Override local authority for ADU zoning, land use or planning. We support the process in Virginia Beach that is currently underway to draft ADU ordinances. We encourage the Virginia General Assembly to give localities MORE authority, not less, to draft and enforce ordinances regarding ADUs. Accordingly, NVBCL requests the following modifications to resolve our exceptions to these bills: 1. We request that paragraph B be modified to give localities full authority to determine whether and where ADUs shall be a permitted use, whether to require a special use permit for an ADU, and what zoning ordinances, building codes, or other requirements shall apply to ADUs. 2. We request that paragraph C be modified to allow localities to determine the amount of permit fees for ADUs, and to determine the zoning ordinances, building codes, and other requirements that will apply to ADUs. Localities need authority to regulate ADU as appropriate and applicable to the circumstances and needs of their communities. 3. We request that paragraph D.6 include “local zoning ordinances” in the list of requirements that localities may require. 4. We request that paragraph E.1 be deleted. Conditions and capacities for parking vary across localities, and across neighborhoods within localities. Localities must retain authority to determine parking requirements that apply to ADUs. 5. We request that paragraph E.2 be moved to subsection D, removing it from the list of what localities shall NOT require, and adding it to the list of what localities MAY require. Localities must have authority to determine lot sizes and setbacks as applicable to conditions and needs of localities and neighborhoods. 6. We request that paragraph E.4 be moved to subsection D, removing it from the list of what localities shall NOT require, and adding it to the list of what localities MAY require. Localities must retain the authority to manage water, sewer, and septic capacity. Please see our attached letter to see our commends in a more readable format.

I oppose HB930. Increased local government regulation will adversely affect an already scarce housing supply, which is driving up the price of new homes. Virginia’s population is growing, and housing is an important factor to our community’s economic growth. Finally, land development pipelines are critical to meet future housing needs. I urge the Committee to reject HB930.

PLEASE work to pass HB930, this is having devastating effects on our school system. My teenager chose to write an essay (the topic was “making a change in something in your world”) on the overcrowding in schools, roads, and infrastructure it is SUCH a major problem. We live in FoxCreek and I fear for my newly driving 16 yr old even pulling out of our neighborhood onto Otterdale or Woolridge Road. Please help so hopefully we can slow the growth of development until the roads and infrastructure are in place to support the development.

We have had an extensive amount of development around the Matoaca District in Chesterfield County, VA. Amazingly, when building homes/apartments/condos in an area of very overcrowded schools, the county supervisors who approve the development applications CANNOT consider the impact of new dwelling units on the schools affected. This is simply absurb. Any housing development approved by county supervisors who should be allowed to consider the impact on schools and deny the application if negative impact is seen, until such time as the negative impact is fixed.

Thank you Mark for this bill. One of your campaign promises to look into the growing issues facing Chesterfield. The growth of the county is out of control and the infrastructure is not there to support it. Its common sense if you do not have the schools or medical facilities to handle the growth then stop the home building. Keep Chesterfield a place where the current residents want to stay.

Thank you Mark!!! I hope none of you need to be admitted to a hospital. You will not get a room any time soon. Family member just went through that last week - even in a life threatening situation - you will WAIT at JW, Chip, Henrico... And still builders are adding thousands of units all over Midlothian. "The love of money is the root of all evil." (I Timothy 6:10) No public amenities in this area are equipped to handle this amount of "growth." Beth

I’m writing to show my support of HB 930, zoning ordinances, adequate public facilities. I live in the Foxcroft neighborhood right in the heart of the fastest growing area in Chesterfield county. I’ve recently been a citizen advocate in two rezoning cases and was disheartened to learn that adequate school capacity could not be used as a decision in denying or approving zoning cases. As an example in October 2021, a 400 unit housing development called Oasis was approved across from Cosby HS. This zoning report for this case showed Woolridge ES, Tomahawk MS and Cosby HS at 96%, 112%, 108% capacity in 2020 when this case was approved and future capacity projections were even higher. At that time, a funding plan for a new high school didn’t exist and projections for Cosby HS were at 147% for 2027. Despite the over crowding of the schools, school capacity could not be used to deny this case and it was approved. This is just one case in many that have been approved without consideration for schools or other inadequate public facilities. The decision makers (Supervisors in Chesterfield) need to be able to reject or approve cases based on inadequate public facilities. Thank you. Kim Owens

PLEASE work to pass HB930 so hopefully we can slow the growth of development until the roads and infrastructure are in place to support the development.

HB1028 - More affordable assisted living needs to be available for those who can’t afford $6000 a year. My mother was fortunate to have the money for 10 years but it’s all been spent.

Do not weaken important financial oversight of this state authority by exempting it from Virginia Public Procurement Act requirements. This authority has a documented track record of exhibiting minimal public transparency with respect to its finances (see a September 2022 investigative report by the Virginia Center for Investigative Journalism), has acknowledged mismanagement of public funds and contracts in discussions among its own board (see March 2023 SRRA Board of Directors minutes), and within the past year has sought a forensic audit. Loosening the critical financial oversight provided to SRRA by the Virginia Public Procurement Act and removing a requirement for competitive bidding from most of the authority’s transactions, which this bill would do, will only heighten the risk of continued mismanagement of public funds by the authority.

Unlimited FREE Buyer Traffic On Autopilot Fully-automated software for SET & FORGET traffic 24/7 Ultra-fast SAME DAY results 100% free traffic and it always will be Click on link ----> https://instantrealtraffic.com/go

Hey there, Natalie from Social Buzzzy , your guide in the exciting world of Instagram growth. I've stumbled upon something extraordinary for skyrocketing your Instagram popularity and I'm thrilled to share it with you! Social Growth Engine unveils a revolutionary service that propels your Instagram engagement to new heights. It's a breeze: - Concentrate on crafting unforgettable content. - Extremely affordable at a mere $36/month. - Utterly reliable (no password needed), incredibly powerful, and the ideal Instagram companion. I've experienced outstanding results firsthand, and I'm sure you will too! Amplify your Instagram presence this instant: http://get.socialbuzzzy.com/instagram_booster To your success, Natalie

I'm Heath, Founder of CaseConnector.io. We're experiencing an overflow of cases from our Client Acquisition Program and see a potential fit with your firm's expertise. Let's discuss further? Reach out at https://caseconnectors.com or my personal email heathd@caseconnector.io Best, Heath Find me on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/heathdonald

On behalf of the Charlottesville City Council, we are in full support of HB1100. The legislation would give us critical tools to protect and expand our tree canopy and natural environment

Dear Members of the Committee, As one of your constituents, I wanted to convey my support for the many tree related bills in front of the committee. These specific Bills will allow localities to more effectively conserve existing trees and maintain newly planted trees. Conserving and increasing Virginia’s tree canopy is critical not only because trees are beautiful, but because they also provide the following crucial benefits: - Reduce flooding - Stormwater runoff reduction - Less heat islands, which leads to reduced energy costs and healthier citizens - Improve air quality and reduce air pollution - Sequester carbon All of these benefits create a win – win – win by helping the environment, improving human health, and providing cost effective positive economic impacts. I hope that you all recognize the critical benefits that trees provide across the state of Virginia and that you will support these bills. Sincerely, Winston Bibee

Comments Document

I am Denise Mosca, a constituent of Keith Hodges in Gloucester County, living at 6977 Ark Road. Please allow HB 529 and HB1100 to pass out of committee to be considered by the House. Because Virginia is a Dillon Rule state, localities need to be granted the flexibility to manage trees specific to their local planning and individual stormwater response. In a 2020 study Virginia Dept. of Forestry VADOF estimated that Virginia is currently losing 14,000 acres annually to land conversion. From 2014 to 2018 Gloucester County has experienced a net loss of 217 acres of tree cover. The 2020 VADOF study delineated the following benefits of trees (see attachment): Trees are a low cost option to provide resilience. Keeping healthy, mature trees on site costs far less than taxpayer-funded programs to construct “hard” storm water infrastructure. HB 529 and HB1100 are local option bills; they provide the freedom to the locality to enact the provisions or not. There is a site specific clause for deviation in HB 529 to address hardship of the developer provided that neighborhood stormwater management and tree preservation goals are considered. Fairfax County has adopted this ordinance package as of 2009 and it has neither slowed nor hindered development or stifled affordable housing initiatives. Virginia has already delegated authority to the localities to implement stormwater plans that make the most sense for their circumstances. Please allow localities the low cost options to maintain and increase tree cover for their stormwater planning and all the benefits that trees provide for Virginia.

Land development is VA is massive business, and despite existing measures our tree canopy is shrinking in the name of gigantic mcmansions and invasive English grass lawns. Tree canopy preservation in every district should have tighter regulations to stop the decimation of our tree canopy.

As a geologist, Invasive Management Areas site leader, and Oakton resident, I support bills HB1000, HB1056, HB1085, HB1100, HB1449, HB1520, HB320, and HB524. These bills will improve the way we understand and and live in harmony with nature by encouraging research partnerships, avoiding the harm of pollution, invasive plants, and pipelines, and encouraging the preservation and protection of valuable ecosystems.

Hi, I"m Alice Tousignant, Richmond City resident and affordable housing advocate. HB 1122 is about promoting and creating mixed income housing, decontrating poverty and housing choice. In the past few years, I've seen thousands of market rate housing going up in various parts of the City, while there is a serious need for housing that households at or below 80% of Area Median Income can afford. Richmond City has tried coaxing developers into adding affordable units to no avail. My friend was at a meeting recently for a new multi-family development. Several area residents who attended the meeting quizzed the developer about adding a few units of affordable housing in the new development. The developer said the numbers didn't work charging a lower rent, but if the City gave him local funds and other incentives in exchange for the units, he could afford to do it. But left to left to their own devices, most developers will not. Thank you.