OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

FSM PRC Meeting Summary – Floodplain Amendments and Private Road Reserve Fund – October 27, 2025

Commissions & Advisory Boards — Monday, October 27, 2025
BodyLoudoun County, Virginia
SessionCommissions & Advisory Boards
DateMonday, October 27, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:02:46

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

It was real.

0:00

I'd like to call it order the October 16th, 2025 facility standards manual public review committee meeting.

0:08

Pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3708.3.

0:15

And in accordance with the Board of Supervisors' policies and procedures on advisory forms of commissions and committees dated October 6, 2022, and the May 16, 2023 PRC bylaws.

0:28

Dave Bryant is participating in a meeting from a remote location in Reston, Virginia.

0:33

And Matt Leslie is participating from a remote location in Roundfield, Virginia.

0:39

It is not open to the public.

1:51

Okay, so we did receive some edits from members.

1:55

One edit I just made was to call us the FSM PRC.

2:00

This is an official acronym change from County Administration.

2:04

So we are no longer just the PRC or the FSM PRC, and it might take me years.

2:12

I think that I'm officially putting in the minutes, so hopefully it'll fit.

2:17

So that was one of the changes.

2:19

Another change was here under the DOEAM update.

2:22

It got a little confusing because we have a chair, the commission has a chair, and the recommendation was to say that the commission asked the FSMPRC chair about the deliberations on the DOEAM, and he reported that there was a healthy discussion.

2:38

So that's just a clarifying change to figure out which chair was talking.

2:43

Again, you see, I slipped in at the same PRC minutes.

2:48

And then as I go down here, this edit was just to state that the floodway guidance was actually in presence distributed to the committee prior to the meeting to clarify that.

3:01

And then if I keep going, this this bullet here, there were a couple statements made, and the we put in numbers to say that there were two distinct things.

3:26

This is a kind of a big change.

3:28

And FEMA indicated that all flood complaint must be treated as a floodway.

3:34

And so I put the staff liaison on board at the FSMPRC on March 27th, 2015 FEMA letter provided as attachment to the July 18th, 2023 Board of Supervisor Staff report following the meeting.

3:47

Just to clarify that that's where we found that.

3:57

So that was just a clarification.

3:59

And then I think so.

4:09

The last one.

4:10

Those are the changes to the minutes.

4:11

Unless anybody else has any changes.

4:13

Thank you to everybody instead of command.

4:15

That's fine, but if anybody has any want to discuss you.

4:22

Approved as edited.

4:26

Second.

4:27

Take a list of moving in, Derek.

4:30

Second.

4:31

Okay.

4:32

Any further discussion?

4:34

All in favor, please say aye.

4:45

So you saw on our agenda.

4:48

I guess there's two main items we're going to try to tackle today.

4:57

And probably a very short presentation on the 10-year preserve fund.

5:02

Oh, four than that.

5:04

Okay.

5:04

All right.

5:05

Maybe it's working.

5:06

All right.

5:07

Maybe the thought on the floodway was uh staff was gonna reflect back on the floodway, flood fringe, floodplain, uh narrative.

5:20

Um allow maybe some interaction.

5:25

I don't really want that to go the interaction part of it to take too much of our time because we do at some point need to get back into the text.

5:37

Doesn't mean that if we have questions while we're going through the text that we can't go back and discuss some of those things, but let's let's try not to make this a 45-minute debate back and forth.

5:49

Um maybe 15-20 minutes or so, and then let's go to the text and like I said, if we have to go back and forth, I think we're happy to do that, but we'll try that on for size and see if so we did send out a couple staff reports after the meeting, had quite a few attachments, including the one I just referenced in the minutes to try to clarify how the county's floodplain is designated.

6:17

Um, and Maggie, I don't know if you can give us sort of just a recap of those details about the dates and when it was designated as a 1985 date in the 2001 day.

6:33

Uh yeah, in 1985, the FEMA flood insurance maps have floodways designated for certain reaches, and during the 2001 read mapping, county staff indicated that they would treat the floodway or all of their major floodplain as floodway.

6:58

So FEMA removed those areas of floodway, FEMA designated floodway from our maps in 2001.

7:07

Um, and so since then that is how we have regulated under the assumption that all areas of major floodplain are considered floodway.

7:19

Um we uh there was a letter from FEMA in 2015 that reiterated this, and if we wanted to have floodways mapped back on, the the county would have to fund that, or we would have to wait for FEMA to do a remapping, which would not be for at least five more years at this point, if not longer.

7:46

They only go out five years on their scheduling.

7:49

So I think that's sort of the broad strokes, a refresh of both the items and what we talked a little bit about last meeting.

8:02

What's the difference between floodway and flood plane again?

8:06

Uh so floodplain is a cumulative term for the floodway and the flood fringe.

8:14

Um, but the floodway is the area that has to be left clear for the uh flood velocities that come through.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Floodplain Management█████████████████████████████████████████████58%
Zoning Regulations████████████████21%
Procedural████████10%
Zoning Ordinance████5%
Engineering And Infrastructure███4%
Technology and Innovation█1%
Legal█1%
Summary of Proceedings

FSM PRC Meeting Summary – Floodplain Amendments and Private Road Reserve Fund – October 27, 2025

The Loudoun County Facility Standards Manual Public Review Committee (FSM PRC) met on October 27, 2025, to review floodplain amendments and a draft private road reserve fund letter. Note: the supplied meeting date is October 27, 2025, while the agenda and transcript reference October 16, 2025. The meeting included scheduled 3:15 p.m. floodplain discussions and a 4:30 p.m. reserve fund update.

Administrative Items

  • The October 2, 2025 minutes were approved as edited, including clarifying changes and the official committee name change to “FSM PRC.”
  • Dave Bryant and Matt Leslie participated remotely from Reston and Roundfield, Virginia.

Floodway Background Discussion

  • Staff explained that FEMA’s 1985 flood maps designated floodways, but after the 2001 remapping, county staff treated all major floodplain as floodway and FEMA removed designated floodways. A 2015 FEMA letter reiterated this arrangement.
  • Floodplain is a cumulative term for floodway plus flood fringe; the floodway must remain clear to preserve flood capacity. Since no mapped floodways remain, all major floodplain is treated as regulatory floodway, generally requiring no rise.
  • Members discussed FEMA regulations (44 CFR 65.6/65.7), LOMAs/CLOMRs, and when engineering analyses are required. The chair suggested deferring some detailed CFR questions until the Chapter 5 text review.

FSM Chapter 8 Review

  • Staff presented cross-reference changes that consolidate repeated floodplain language into a new Section 8.101, applied across plats, site plans, CPAPs, grading permits, easement plats, dedication plats, and division plats.
  • Floodplain and source-of-floodplain notes were added to additional plat types; reforestation plans and demolition/removal of existing improvements were added to existing conditions plan requirements.
  • The committee completed Chapter 8 review: “Eight is done.”

FSM Chapter 5 – Floodplain Alteration Types

  • The discussion centered on making no-rise certification a Type 1 floodplain alteration and removing the separate “declaration of no impact” process.
  • Staff said the change improves tracking and aligns with guidance requiring computations/data; some members expressed concern that minor utility or underground work would require a separate application and fee.
  • Committee members and staff debated options including Landmark sub-records, re-creating option one/option two/option three under Type 1, fee tiers, and when Chapter 8 submittal requirements apply.
  • Staff was asked to explore: (1) tracking no-rise certifications on CPAPs/site plans without a separate application; (2) creating suboptions under Type 1 based on analysis complexity; (3) clarifying Type 1 vs Type 2 Chapter 8 requirements; and (4) determining when a floodplain study or corrective effective analysis is needed with a no-rise certification.

10-Year Private Road Reserve Fund Update

  • Staff presented a draft standard letter for developers/property owners to satisfy the private road reserve fund requirement, covering four scenarios: new HOA, annexation into an existing HOA, private road maintenance agreement, and commercial self-maintenance.
  • Suggestions included adding state code references, changing “we will prepare” to “will be prepared” to account for future phases, and adding HOA acknowledgement for annexation.
  • Staff requested comments by October 31, 2025, and will draft a tech memo explaining the temporary requirement.

Next Meetings

  • Tentative: Thursday, November 6, 2025, and Thursday, November 20, 2025, in the Dulles Room.

Key Outcomes

  • Minutes approved as edited.
  • FSM Chapter 8 floodplain-related edits completed.
  • No final decisions made on Chapter 5 floodplain alteration types; staff will return with options and clarifications.
  • Private road reserve fund letter comments due October 31, 2025; staff will incorporate feedback, coordinate with the county attorney, and draft a tech memo.

Meeting Transcript

It was real. I'd like to call it order the October 16th, 2025 facility standards manual public review committee meeting. Pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3708.3. And in accordance with the Board of Supervisors' policies and procedures on advisory forms of commissions and committees dated October 6, 2022, and the May 16, 2023 PRC bylaws. Dave Bryant is participating in a meeting from a remote location in Reston, Virginia. And Matt Leslie is participating from a remote location in Roundfield, Virginia. It is not open to the public. Okay, so we did receive some edits from members. One edit I just made was to call us the FSM PRC. This is an official acronym change from County Administration. So we are no longer just the PRC or the FSM PRC, and it might take me years. I think that I'm officially putting in the minutes, so hopefully it'll fit. So that was one of the changes. Another change was here under the DOEAM update. It got a little confusing because we have a chair, the commission has a chair, and the recommendation was to say that the commission asked the FSMPRC chair about the deliberations on the DOEAM, and he reported that there was a healthy discussion. So that's just a clarifying change to figure out which chair was talking. Again, you see, I slipped in at the same PRC minutes. And then as I go down here, this edit was just to state that the floodway guidance was actually in presence distributed to the committee prior to the meeting to clarify that. And then if I keep going, this this bullet here, there were a couple statements made, and the we put in numbers to say that there were two distinct things. This is a kind of a big change. And FEMA indicated that all flood complaint must be treated as a floodway. And so I put the staff liaison on board at the FSMPRC on March 27th, 2015 FEMA letter provided as attachment to the July 18th, 2023 Board of Supervisor Staff report following the meeting. Just to clarify that that's where we found that. So that was just a clarification. And then I think so. The last one. Those are the changes to the minutes. Unless anybody else has any changes. Thank you to everybody instead of command. That's fine, but if anybody has any want to discuss you. Approved as edited. Second. Take a list of moving in, Derek. Second. Okay. Any further discussion? All in favor, please say aye. So you saw on our agenda. I guess there's two main items we're going to try to tackle today. And probably a very short presentation on the 10-year preserve fund. Oh, four than that. Okay. All right. Maybe it's working. All right. Maybe the thought on the floodway was uh staff was gonna reflect back on the floodway, flood fringe, floodplain, uh narrative. Um allow maybe some interaction. I don't really want that to go the interaction part of it to take too much of our time because we do at some point need to get back into the text. Doesn't mean that if we have questions while we're going through the text that we can't go back and discuss some of those things, but let's let's try not to make this a 45-minute debate back and forth. Um maybe 15-20 minutes or so, and then let's go to the text and like I said, if we have to go back and forth, I think we're happy to do that, but we'll try that on for size and see if so we did send out a couple staff reports after the meeting, had quite a few attachments, including the one I just referenced in the minutes to try to clarify how the county's floodplain is designated.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com