Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cbpa House 108 Colonel Philip Johnson topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board defers decision on Kingsmill house after debate over footprint and mitigation
Summary
The Chesapeake Bay Board deferred action on a proposed single‑family dwelling at 108 Colonel Philip Johnson after members raised concerns that the building footprint exceeded minimums and lacked additional long‑term mitigation; the applicants requested a deferral to provide mitigation options.
The James City County Chesapeake Bay Board on March 12 deferred action on a Chesapeake Bay exception for a single‑family dwelling proposed at 108 Colonel Philip Johnson in the Kingsmill subdivision, citing board concerns about the size of the house footprint relative to neighborhood minimums and the absence of additional long‑term mitigation measures.
Amanda Frazier, watershed planner, summarized the revised submission: the lot is 0.55 acres, with roughly 95% inside the RPA; total RPA impacts were listed as 4,035 square feet (3,307 square feet administratively within the landward 50 feet and 728 square feet of legislative impacts in the seaward 50 feet). Staff calculated required mitigation for the proposed impervious impacts as 10 planting units — specifically 10 canopy trees, 20 understory trees and 30 shrubs — and said the applicants submitted 11 planting units (10 canopy trees, 21 understory trees and 42 shrubs), exceeding the county’s stated mitigation requirements. Staff recommended approval with conditions including a $5,500 surety to guarantee mitigation plantings and a recorded affidavit prior to building permit issuance.
The board’s discussion focused on whether the proposal represented the “minimum necessary to afford relief” under the ordinance. One board member said the structure’s footprint was “about 50% above what the minimum building requirement is for that area,” and expressed concern that, with no additional mitigation measures (such as post‑construction infiltration or other BMPs), approving the exception could amount to granting a special privilege relative to similarly situated properties.
Roger McClellan of Marquis Homes (the applicant) and Robin Phillips (property owner) spoke at the hearing. Phillips described the lot’s history, saying her father bought it decades ago and intended to build a small, single‑story house for retirement; she said a one‑story home was preferred because “he was getting older.” Real‑estate agent John Enright told the board that in his experience “a 1,600 square foot home probably does not exist in Kingsmill and would not be marketable or saleable,” arguing that the neighborhood market tends toward larger homes.
After initial consideration a motion to deny the application was made and then withdrawn to allow further public comment. The applicant requested a deferral to develop additional mitigation options; the board closed the public hearing and voted to defer the matter to the April 2025 meeting. The motion to defer passed 5–0.
Staff conditions as presented will remain available for the applicant to address at the next hearing; the exception approval would become null and void if construction has not begun by March 12, 2026 unless an extension is timely requested.
