12/21/2009 1

Table 1: Existing UTC area and percentages for the County. *% Total Land Area includes area covered by water.

Updated - A Report on the County of Arlington’s Existing and Possible Urban Tree Canopy

UTC: Urban tree canopy (UTC) is the layer of leaves, branches, and stems of trees that cover the ground when viewed from above. Land Cover: Physical features on the earth mapped from sat-ellite or aerial imagery such as trees, or water. Existing UTC: The amount of UTC present within parcel boundaries. Possible UTC: The amount of land that is theoretically avail-able for the establishment of tree canopy within parcel boundaries. Possible UTC excludes areas covered by tree can-opy, roads, buildings, and water. It is the combination of Pos-sible UTC - Vegetation and Possible UTC - Impervious. Possible UTC - Vegetation: The amount of land that is theo-retically available for the establishment of tree canopy in non-tree vegetation areas within parcel boundaries. This excludes areas covered by tree canopy, impervious surfaces, and wa-ter. Possible UTC - Impervious: The amount of land that is theo-retically available for the establishment of tree canopy in impervious areas within parcel boundaries. This includes impervious areas (roads, parking lots, and sidewalks) except for buildings.

Key TermsKey Terms

Figure 1: Land cover for the County of Arlington.

Figure 1 shows the UTC analysis for Arlington, which is derived from high resolution aerial imagery. 6,353 acres of Arlington is covered by tree canopy (termed Existing UTC). This corresponds to 43% of the total land area within the County (Table 1). An additional 4010 acres of the county could theoretically be improved to support urban tree canopy (termed Possible UTC), Table 2.

How Much Tree Canopy Does How Much Tree Canopy Does

Arlington Have?Arlington Have?

Urban tree canopy (UTC) is the layer of leaves, branches, and stems of trees that cover the ground when viewed from above. Urban tree canopy provides many benefits to communities including improving water quality, conserving energy, lowering county temperatures, reducing air pollution, enhancing property values, providing wildlife habitat, facilitating social and educational opportunities, and providing aesthetic benefits.

Why is Tree Canopy Why is Tree Canopy

Important?Important?

UTC Classes Existing UTC

Acres % Total Land Area* % Land Area

Tree Canopy 6353.1 43.3% 43.5%

Non-Tree Vegetation 2504.2 17.1% 17.2%

Non-Building Impervious 4100.9 28.0% 28.1%

Buildings Impervious 1632.1 11.1% 11.2%

Water 72.6 0.5% 0.0%

Total Area 16701 100.0% 100.0%

The analysis of Arlington’s urban tree canopy (UTC) was carried out at the request of the Virginia Department of Forestry in collaboration with the County of Arlington and the Chesapeake Bay Program. The analysis was per-formed by the Virginia Geospatial Extension Program (VGEP) at Virginia Tech’s Department of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation in consultation with the Spatial Analysis Laboratory (SAL) of the University of Vermont.

The goal of the project was to apply the USDA Forest Service’s UTC assess-ment protocols to the County of Arlington. This analysis was conducted based on year 2008 data.

In this update all federal lands have been removed from the analysis, so that all of the land area included may possibly be affected by Arlington County.

Project BackgroundProject Background

12/21/2009 2

Par

cels

Ex

isti

ng

UTC

Mapping Arlington’s TreesMapping Arlington’s Trees

Using high-resolution (1 meter) National Agriculture Imagery Pro-gram (NAIP) imagery acquired in the summer of 2008 (Figure 2a) in combination with remote sensing techniques, land cover data for the County was generated (Figure 2b). A 94% accuracy rate was found after conducting an accuracy assessment. Single trees with canopies larger than 16 square meters were detected.

Who “Owns” Arlington’s Trees?Who “Owns” Arlington’s Trees?

The detailed land cover mapping conducted as part of this assess-ment allowed the percentage of Existing and Possible UTC to be cal-culated for each parcel of land (Figure 3). Using this data, ownership patterns for Existing UTC and Possible UTC (Figure 4) can be exam-ined.

Figure 3: UTC metrics summarized at the property parcel level Figure 2a, 2b: Comparison of 2008 NAIP imagery to the resulting high-resolution land cover.

Land Cover Derived from 2008 NAIP Imagery (1m)

2008 NAIP Imagery (1m)

Po

ssib

le U

TC

12/21/2009 3

Figure 4: Existing UTC mapped using Non-Federal property parcels provided by the County of Arlington.

12/21/2009 4

Using the parcel data provided by the County of Arlington, Existing and Possible UTC were summarized by property parcels with federally owned parcels removed. This summary excludes any area outside of non-federally owned property parcel boundaries and areas covered by water. Figure 4 shows Existing UTC through out the County of Arlington summarized by non-federal property parcels. Arlington has 48% (5,174 acres) Existing UTC and 37% (4,009 acres) Possible UTC, table 2. Possible UTC has two components, Possible UTC - Vegetation and Possible UTC - Impervious. 18% (1,899 acres) of parcel land area is associated with Possible UTC - Vegetation. 20% (2,110 acres) of parcel land area is associated with Possible UTC - Impervious (Figure 5).

Urban Tree Canopy Summarized by NonUrban Tree Canopy Summarized by Non--

Federally Owned Property ParcelsFederally Owned Property Parcels Urban Tree Canopy Summarized by Zoning Urban Tree Canopy Summarized by Zoning

CategoriesCategories

Figure 6a: UTC metrics summarized by zoning categories with more than 400 acres of land area (not including water area) which comprises 83% (11,987 acres) of the land area in zoning.

Figure 5: Pie chart showing Arlington UTC distribution within non-federally owned parcels.

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500

Special District: S-3A

One-Family, Restricted Two Family Dwelling District: R-5

One-Family Dwelling District: R-10

One-Family Dwelling District: R-8

One-Family Dwelling District: R-6

Apartment Dwelling District: RA14-26

Apartment Dwelling District: RA8-18

Apartment Dwelling District: RA6-15

Acres

Possible UTC Area

Possible Area-Vegetation

Possible Area-Impervious

Existing UTC Area

Land Area

48%

18%

20%

15%

Existing UTC Possible UTC - VegetationPossible UTC - Impervious Not Suitable for UTC

Using the zoning data provided by the County of Arlington, Existing and Possible UTC were summarized by zoning category (pages 4 - 8). This summary excludes any area outside the analysis boundary and areas covered by water. The zoning category One-Family Dwell-ing District: R-6 has the largest amount of land area with 4,319 acres and the largest amount of Existing UTC, 33.9% (Table 3a). Special District: S3-A and One-Family Dwelling District: R-10 are 2nd (22.2%) and 3rd (17.5%) in Existing UTC respectively. Figure 6a and 6b compare zoning categories by the amount of land area within the categories. Figure 6a compares zoning categories that have more than 400 acres, which comprises 83% of the land area. Figure 6b compares zones with less than 400 acres of land area (17% of the land area). Figure 7 shows Possible UTC by zoning category for the County.

UTC Parcel Metrics Acres % Parcel Land Area

Parcel Land Area 10810.0 100.0%

Existing UTC 5173.9 47.9%

Possible UTC 4009.1 37.1%

Possible UTC - Vegetation 1898.7 17.6%

Possible UTC - Impervious 2110.4 19.5%

Not Suitable for UTC* 1626.9 15.1%

Table 2: Acres and percent land area from UTC metrics summarized by non-federally owned property parcels.

*Not Suitable for UTC includes all Building Impervious areas within the parcel boundaries.

12/21/2009 5

Figure 6b: UTC metrics summarized by zoning with less than 400 acres of land area (not including water area) which comprises 17% (2,436 acres) of the land area.

Urban Tree Canopy Summarized by Arlington’s Zoning CategoriesUrban Tree Canopy Summarized by Arlington’s Zoning Categories

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Two-Family and Town House Dwelling District: R2-7

Special Development District: S-D

Service Industrial District: M-2

Service Commercial - Community Business Districts: C-2

Restricted Local Commercial District: C-1-R

Residential Town House Dwelling District: R15-30T

Public Service District: P-S

One-Family Dwelling District: R-20

One Family Residential-Town-House Dwelling District: R-10T

Multiple-Family Dwelling and Hotel District: RA-H-3.2

Mixed Use-Virginia Square: MU-VS

Local Commercial District: C-1

Limited Industrial District: CM

Limited Commercial - Professional Office Building District: C-1-O

Light Industrial District: M-1

Hotel District: RA-H

General Commercial District: C-3

C-O-ROSSLYN: C-O-ROSS

Commercial Town House District: C-TH

Commercial Redevelopment District: C-R

Commercial Office Building, Hotel and Apartment District: C-O-2.5

Commercial Office Building, Hotel and Apartment District: C-O-1.5

Commercial Office Building, Hotel and Apartment District: C-O-1.0

Commercial Off. Bldg, Hotel and Multiple-Family Dwelling: C-O

Commercial Off. Bldg, Hotel and Apartment District: C-O-A

Columbia Pike - Form Based Code District: CP-FBC

Apartment Dwelling District: RA7-16

Apartment Dwelling District: RA4.8

Apartment Dwelling and Commercial District: RC

Acres

Possible UTC Area

Possible Area-Vegetation

Possible Area-Impervious

Existing UTC Area

Land Area

12

/2

1/2

00

9

6

Zon

ing

Cat

ego

ry

Lan

d A

rea

(Acr

es)

Exis

tin

g U

TC

Po

ssib

le U

TC V

eget

atio

n

Po

ssib

le U

TC Im

pe

rvio

us

% L

and

A

rea

% Z

on

ing

Cat

ego

ry

% U

TC

Typ

e

% L

and

A

rea

% Z

on

ing

Cat

ego

ry

% U

TC

Typ

e

% L

and

A

rea

% Z

on

ing

Cat

ego

ry

% U

TC

Typ

e

Ap

artm

en

t D

we

llin

g an

d C

om

me

rcia

l Dis

tric

t: R

C

41

0

.03

%

10

.31

%

0.0

7%

0

.02

%

5.8

9%

0

.10

%

0.1

1%

3

8.0

6%

0

.34

%

Ap

artm

en

t D

we

llin

g D

istr

ict:

RA

4.8

6

2

0.0

8%

1

8.8

1%

0

.19

%

0.0

3%

7

.39

%

0.1

9%

0

.19

%

43

.91

%

0.6

0%

Ap

artm

en

t D

we

llin

g D

istr

ict:

RA

6-1

5 4

07

0

.76

%

27

.07

%

1.7

6%

0

.39

%

13

.67

%

2.2

5%

1

.30

%

46

.05

%

4.1

0%

Ap

artm

en

t D

we

llin

g D

istr

ict:

RA

7-1

6 1

09

0

.26

%

33

.85

%

0.5

9%

0

.12

%

16

.12

%

0.7

1%

0

.30

%

39

.05

%

0.9

3%

Ap

artm

en

t D

we

llin

g D

istr

ict:

RA

8-1

8 5

23

1

.07

%

29

.58

%

2.4

7%

0

.56

%

15

.55

%

3.2

8%

1

.54

%

42

.59

%

4.8

7%

Ap

artm

en

t D

we

llin

g D

istr

ict:

RA

14

-26

75

9

2.1

9%

4

1.5

9%

5

.04

%

0.8

3%

1

5.7

4%

4

.83

%

1.8

9%

3

5.9

7%

5

.97

%

Co

lum

bia

Pik

e -

Fo

rm B

ase

d C

od

e D

istr

ict:

CP

-FB

C

2

0.0

1%

3

7.0

7%

0

.01

%

0.0

0%

2

5.5

7%

0

.02

%

0.0

1%

4

3.8

2%

0

.02

%

Co

mm

erc

ial O

ff. B

ldg,

Ho

tel a

nd

Ap

artm

en

t D

istr

ict:

C-O

-A

42

0

.02

%

5.2

2%

0

.03

%

0.0

0%

1

.02

%

0.0

2%

0

.11

%

37

.85

%

0.3

5%

Co

mm

erc

ial O

ff. B

ldg,

Ho

tel a

nd

Mu

ltip

le-F

amily

Dw

ellin

g: C

-O

21

2

0.0

9%

6

.42

%

0.2

2%

0

.09

%

6.3

1%

0

.54

%

0.6

2%

4

2.4

8%

1

.97

%

Co

mm

erc

ial O

ffic

e B

uild

ing,

Ho

tel a

nd

Ap

artm

en

t D

istr

ict:

C-O

-1.0

2

2

0.0

3%

2

3.0

6%

0

.08

%

0.0

1%

8

.78

%

0.0

8%

0

.06

%

41

.54

%

0.2

0%

Co

mm

erc

ial O

ffic

e B

uild

ing,

Ho

tel a

nd

Ap

artm

en

t D

istr

ict:

C-O

-1.5

1

92

0

.21

%

15

.44

%

0.4

7%

0

.24

%

17

.76

%

1.3

8%

0

.68

%

51

.10

%

2.1

5%

Co

mm

erc

ial O

ffic

e B

uild

ing,

Ho

tel a

nd

Ap

artm

en

t D

istr

ict:

C-O

-2.5

2

25

0

.16

%

10

.48

%

0.3

8%

0

.14

%

9.2

0%

0

.84

%

0.7

0%

4

4.6

7%

2

.19

%

Co

mm

erc

ial R

ed

eve

lop

me

nt

Dis

tric

t: C

-R

14

0

.00

%

3.4

7%

0

.01

%

0.0

0%

3

.53

%

0.0

2%

0

.03

%

29

.25

%

0.0

9%

Co

mm

erc

ial T

ow

n H

ou

se D

istr

ict:

C-T

H

6

0.0

0%

8

.00

%

0.0

1%

0

.00

%

10

.23

%

0.0

3%

0

.02

%

34

.52

%

0.0

5%

C-O

-RO

SSLY

N: C

-O-R

OSS

1

3

0.0

0%

1

.80

%

0.0

0%

0

.00

%

0.8

2%

0

.00

%

0.0

3%

2

9.5

5%

0

.09

%

Ge

ne

ral C

om

me

rcia

l Dis

tric

t: C

-3

64

0

.03

%

7.0

2%

0

.07

%

0.0

3%

5

.83

%

0.1

5%

0

.18

%

39

.93

%

0.5

6%

Ho

tel D

istr

ict:

RA

-H

30

0

.02

%

8.9

5%

0

.04

%

0.0

1%

6

.18

%

0.0

8%

0

.13

%

59

.74

%

0.3

9%

Ligh

t In

du

stri

al D

istr

ict:

M-1

8

7

0.0

5%

9

.03

%

0.1

3%

0

.04

%

6.9

5%

0

.24

%

0.3

4%

5

6.4

6%

1

.07

%

Lim

ite

d C

om

me

rcia

l - P

rofe

ssio

nal

Off

ice

Bu

ildin

g D

istr

ict:

C-1

-O

3

0.0

0%

2

6.6

2%

0

.01

%

0.0

0%

1

1.0

5%

0

.01

%

0.0

1%

4

0.5

9%

0

.02

%

Lim

ite

d In

du

stri

al D

istr

ict:

CM

3

8

0.0

3%

9

.78

%

0.0

6%

0

.04

%

15

.79

%

0.2

4%

0

.15

%

55

.06

%

0.4

6%

Loca

l Co

mm

erc

ial D

istr

ict:

C-1

9

0

0.0

5%

8

.00

%

0.1

2%

0

.04

%

6.3

9%

0

.23

%

0.2

9%

4

6.4

0%

0

.91

%

Mix

ed

Use

-Vir

gin

ia S

qu

are

: MU

-VS

1

0.0

0%

0

.00

%

0.0

0%

0

.00

%

0.0

0%

0

.00

%

0.0

0%

2

4.7

3%

0

.01

%

Mu

ltip

le-F

amily

Dw

elli

ng

and

Ho

tel D

istr

ict:

RA

-H-3

.2

70

0

.05

%

11

.00

%

0.1

2%

0

.04

%

7.8

3%

0

.22

%

0.1

8%

3

6.5

7%

0

.56

%

On

e-F

amily

Dw

elli

ng

Dis

tric

t: R

-6

43

19

14

.75

%

49

.26

%

33

.95

%

5.5

4%

1

8.4

9%

3

2.2

6%

8

.70

%

29

.07

%

27

.46

%

Urb

an T

ree

Can

op

y Su

mm

ariz

ed b

y Zo

nin

g C

ateg

ori

esU

rban

Tre

e C

ano

py

Sum

mar

ized

by

Zon

ing

Cat

ego

ries

% U

TC T

ype

=

Are

a o

f U

TC

typ

e fo

r sp

ecif

ied

lan

d u

se

Are

a o

f a

ll U

TC

typ

e

% L

and

=

Are

a o

f U

TC

typ

e fo

r sp

ecif

ied

lan

d u

se

Are

a o

f a

ll la

nd

The

% L

and

Use

val

ue

of

49.

26%

ind

icat

es t

hat

49

.26%

of

“On

e-F

amily

Dw

elli

ng

Dis

tric

t: R

-6”

lan

d is

co

vere

d b

y tr

ee c

ano

py.

Th

e %

UTC

Typ

e va

lue

of

33

.95

% in

dic

ates

th

at 3

3.9

5%

of

all E

xist

ing

UTC

lies

in

area

s o

f “O

ne

-Fam

ily D

wel

ling

Dis

tric

t: R

-6”

lan

d u

se.

% C

ate

gory

=

Are

a o

f U

TC

typ

e fo

r sp

ecif

ied

lan

d u

se

Are

a o

f a

ll la

nd

fo

r sp

ecif

ied

lan

d u

se

The

% C

ate

gory

val

ue

of

14

.75

% i

nd

icat

es t

hat

14.

75%

of

Arl

ingt

on

’s la

nd

are

a is

tre

e c

ano

py

in a

reas

wh

ere

the

lan

d u

se i

s “O

ne

-Fam

ily D

we

llin

g D

istr

ict:

R-

6”.

Tab

le 3

a:

UTC

met

rics

by

typ

e, s

um

ma

rize

d b

y zo

nin

g c

ate

go

ries

. F

or

each

zo

ne,

ca

teg

ory

UTC

met

rics

wer

e co

mp

ute

d a

s a

per

cen

t o

f a

ll zo

ned

lan

d in

th

e C

ou

nty

(%

La

nd

Are

a),

as

a p

erce

nt

of

lan

d a

rea

by

zon

ing

ca

teg

ori

es (

% Z

on

ing

Ca

teg

ory

) a

nd

as

a p

erce

nt

of

the

are

a f

or

the

UTC

typ

e (%

UTC

Typ

e).

12

/2

1/2

00

9

7

Urb

an T

ree

Can

op

y Su

mm

ariz

ed b

y Zo

nin

g C

ateg

ori

es C

on

tin

ued

Urb

an T

ree

Can

op

y Su

mm

ariz

ed b

y Zo

nin

g C

ateg

ori

es C

on

tin

ued

Tab

le 3

b :

UTC

met

rics

by

typ

e, s

um

ma

rize

d b

y zo

nin

g c

ate

go

ries

. Fo

r ea

ch z

on

e, c

ate

go

ry U

TC m

etri

cs w

ere

com

pu

ted

as

a p

erce

nt

of

all

zon

ed la

nd

in t

he

Co

un

ty (

% L

an

d A

rea

), a

s a

per

cen

t o

f la

nd

are

a b

y zo

nin

g c

ate

go

ries

(%

Zo

nin

g C

ate

go

ry)

an

d a

s a

per

cen

t o

f th

e a

rea

fo

r th

e U

TC t

ype

(% U

TC T

ype)

.

Zon

ing

Cat

ego

ry

Lan

d A

rea

(Acr

es)

Exis

tin

g U

TC

Po

ssib

le U

TC V

eget

atio

n

Po

ssib

le U

TC Im

pe

rvio

us

% L

and

A

rea

% Z

on

ing

Cat

ego

ry

% U

TC

Typ

e

% L

and

A

rea

% Z

on

ing

Cat

ego

ry

% U

TC

Typ

e

% L

and

A

rea

% Z

on

ing

Cat

ego

ry

% U

TC

Typ

e

On

e-F

amily

Dw

elli

ng

Dis

tric

t: R

-8

56

3

2.1

4%

5

4.9

5%

4

.94

%

0.6

2%

0

.62

%

0.6

2%

0

.96

%

24

.67

%

3.0

4%

On

e-F

amily

Dw

elli

ng

Dis

tric

t: R

-10

2

02

5 7

.64

%

54

.40

%

17

.58

%

2.5

2%

2

.52

%

2.5

2%

3

.68

%

26

.22

%

11

.61

%

On

e-F

amily

Dw

elli

ng

Dis

tric

t: R

-20

2

50

1

.21

%

69

.79

%

2.7

9%

0

.20

%

0.2

0%

0

.20

%

0.3

2%

1

8.3

0%

1

.00

%

On

e F

amily

Re

sid

en

tial

-To

wn

-Ho

use

Dw

elli

ng

Dis

tric

t: R

-10

T 8

3

0.2

4%

4

1.2

2%

0

.54

%

0.0

7%

0

.07

%

0.0

7%

0

.17

%

29

.91

%

0.5

4%

On

e-F

amily

, Re

stri

cte

d T

wo

Fam

ily D

we

llin

g D

istr

ict:

R-5

4

97

1

.49

%

43

.10

%

3.4

2%

0

.61

%

0.6

1%

0

.61

%

1.0

5%

3

0.3

6%

3

.30

%

Pu

blic

Se

rvic

e D

istr

ict:

P-S

1

08

0

.10

%

13

.93

%

0.2

4%

0

.15

%

0.0

5%

0

.00

%

0.4

9%

6

6.1

6%

1

.56

%

Re

sid

en

tial

To

wn

Ho

use

Dw

ellin

g D

istr

ict:

R1

5-3

0T

61

0

.10

%

24

.51

%

0.2

4%

0

.05

%

0.0

0%

0

.12

%

0.1

6%

3

7.6

1%

0

.50

%

Re

stri

cte

d L

oca

l Co

mm

erc

ial D

istr

ict:

C-1

-R

3

0.0

0%

6

.85

%

0.0

0%

0

.00

%

0.1

2%

0

.03

%

0.0

1%

4

7.3

0%

0

.03

%

Serv

ice

Co

mm

erc

ial -

Co

mm

un

ity

Bu

sin

ess

Dis

tric

ts: C

-2

26

0

0.1

6%

8

.76

%

0.3

6%

0

.12

%

0.0

3%

0

.04

%

0.8

0%

4

4.6

7%

2

.54

%

Serv

ice

Ind

ust

rial

Dis

tric

t: M

-2

15

0

.01

%

11

.55

%

0.0

3%

0

.03

%

0.0

4%

4

.24

%

0.0

7%

6

4.9

6%

0

.22

%

Spe

cial

De

velo

pm

en

t D

istr

ict:

S-D

5

1

0.1

0%

2

8.2

5%

0

.23

%

0.0

4%

4

.24

%

0.3

3%

0

.14

%

38

.98

%

0.4

4%

Spe

cial

Dis

tric

t: S

-3A

2

89

4 9

.65

%

48

.08

%

22

.21

%

4.2

4%

0

.33

%

0.0

0%

5

.63

%

28

.08

%

17

.77

%

Two

-Fam

ily a

nd

To

wn

Ho

use

Dw

elli

ng

Dis

tric

t: R

2-7

2

82

0

.69

%

35

.48

%

1.6

0%

0

.33

%

0.0

0%

0

.00

%

0.6

7%

3

4.0

6%

2

.10

%

12/21/2009 8

Figure 7: Possible percentage increase of UTC mapped using zoning categories provided by the County of Arlington.

12/21/2009 9

Decision makers can use GIS to find out specific UTC metrics for a parcel or zoning category. This information can be used to estimate the amount of tree loss in a planned development or set UTC improve-ment goals for an area.

Jennifer McKee Geospatial Project Developer Virginia Geospatial Extension Program Department of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation Virginia Tech 540-231-9115, jmckee@vt.edu http://www.gep.frec.vt.edu

Prepared by:Prepared by: Additional InformationAdditional Information

The study was conducted with funding from the Virginia Department of Forestry. More information on the UTC as-sessment project can be found at the following web site. http://nrs.fs.fed.us/urban/utc/ http://www.gep.frec.vt.edu/va_utc.html

Where to Plant Trees?Where to Plant Trees?

Figure 8: Parcel-based UTC metrics can be used to support targeted UTC.

GIS Database

Arlington’s urban tree canopy is a vital community asset, reducing stormwater runoff, improving air quality, reducing the County’s carbon footprint, enhancing quality of life, contributing to savings on energy bills, and serving as habitat for wildlife.

With 43.5% canopy coverage of all land area within the county, Arlington has similar coverage as Charlottesville, Fairfax County, and Lexington. Figure 9 shows how Arlington compares to other Virginia localities participating in Urban Tree Canopy Assessments.

When summarized by property parcels, Arlington has 48% Existing UTC with only 28% of all parcels with less than 30% canopy coverage.

74% (4,621 acres) of the Existing UTC is located within the following zoning categories: One-Family Dwelling District: R-6, Special District: S-3A, and One-Family Dwelling District: R-10.

Conclusions Conclusions

Figure 9: Comparison of Existing UTC of % land area (excludes water area) with other Virginia localities that have completed UTC assessments.

44%47%

41%

27%

44%

58%

27% 26%

20%

27%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Exis

tin

g U

TC