Board of Appeals approves variance to allow limited clearing and drainage work on steep-sloped lot

The St. Mary's County Board of Appeals approved a variance for VAAP 04-0876 on Nov. 20, 2008, allowing limited disturbance of steep slopes and vegetation within a critical-area buffer after the applicant submitted a geotechnical evaluation and revised drainage plans.

The board revisited a case continued from September to obtain an engineering review and additional agency comments. The board accepted a report by Bob Taylor Engineering, new comments from the Critical Area Commission and input from county staff and the Soil Conservation District before voting to approve the variance with conditions, including a buffer management plan, a 3-to-1 planting mitigation requirement and DNR review for possible forest interior dwelling species (FIDS) protections.

The variance had been continued so the board could get more information about soils, erosion potential and foundation stability. William Higgs, the applicant's surveyor, told the board staff and outside reviewers had raised questions about steep slopes and future septic reserve areas; the property owner agreed to reduce clearing if the health department allowed the future septic reserve area to be shown on plans rather than cleared now. Health department guidance required a 25-foot setback from steep slopes for both initial and future septic reserve areas, and staff sought clarification from Daryl Calvano, Environmental Director for Environmental Health, whether future SRAs must be graded now or could be shown on the site plan.

An independent geotechnical review by Bob Taylor Engineering found the site’s soils (a mix described in the report as Eastborough/Westphalia-type soils) would support the house foundation with stepped footings; the reviewer recommended replacing proposed dry wells with a sand-filter system and a small outlet pipe routed to a protected slope to avoid erosive discharge. Bruce Young of the Soil Conservation District described the proposed permanent diversion and outfall, saying the structure could be hand‑constructed with minimal disturbance, vegetated with topsoil and would dissipate outflow so it would not create an erosive outlet.

Staff told the board that several preconditions in the staff recommendation had already been met, including obtaining a geotechnical evaluation. The board removed some prior conditions (including a requirement for pervious pavement for walkways, based on the engineer’s findings) but kept conditions requiring a revised site plan that reduces the limits of disturbance to the primary septic system only, a buffer management plan for review by the Department of Land Use and Growth Management, a 3:1 planting mitigation per square foot of variance granted, and DNR Wildlife and Heritage Service review to determine whether additional conservation measures are required because the parcel lies within a potential FIDS area.

The board voted to approve the variance and directed staff to prepare an order reflecting the decision within 60 days; the order will be mailed after signing and may be appealed in circuit court within 30 days of the date the order is signed.

The board’s approval is conditioned on the applicant resubmitting revised plans for agency reapproval and meeting the mitigation and plan requirements the board specified.