Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Steep Slopes Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board continues Cat Creek steep-slope variance to Nov. 20, asks for geotechnical and agency reviews
Summary
A variance request for a 1.93-acre lot on Cat Creek Road in Mechanicsville was continued to Nov. 20 to allow geotechnical testing, Department of Public Works review and a Critical Area Commission site visit; staff had recommended conditional approval with mitigation and geotech requirements.
The St. Mary’s County Board of Appeals on Sept. 25 continued a variance request for a property at 27215 Cat Creek Road in Mechanicsville so the applicant can provide a geotechnical study and county agencies can inspect the site.
The applicant, represented by an engineer who identified himself as Mr. Higgs, and property owner Golden West Construction are seeking variances to disturb steep slopes (section 71.7 of the St. Mary’s County Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance) and to place impervious surface in the expanded critical-area buffer (section 71.8.0.3) to allow construction of a single-family dwelling, driveway, septic and well on a recorded, grandfathered lot.
Staff described the property as a 1.93-acre recorded lot in the Riverwood Farms subdivision (Sixth Election District) constrained by steep slopes, erodible soils, floodplain and a stream on Cat Creek. Staff reported the proposed impervious surface (house, driveway and walks) totals about 2,809 square feet; the total disturbed area for construction was estimated at about 11,000 square feet. The buildable area was calculated after subtracting 4,328 square feet of mapped wetlands; the lot’s 15% lot-coverage limit (10,655 square feet) was not exceeded.
Staff recommended conditional approval because without the variance the recorded lot could not be developed. Recommended conditions included submission of a geotechnical study for Department of Public Works review, adherence to a Critical Area planting agreement (or payment of fees if mitigation cannot be achieved onsite), preference for pervious pavement for the driveway and pervious or mulched walkways, and contact with the Maryland Department of Natural Resources if forest-interior dwelling species (FIDS) habitat is present.
Board members raised concerns about site stability, runoff and the extent of grading. Mr. Higgs told the board the plan calls for cutting a crown from the top of the hill—no engineered fill—and that grading would extend roughly 130 feet back to accommodate the house and septic. He also said dry wells were proposed and the applicant would obtain an engineered erosion-control plan.
Given board concern about slope stability and stormwater, the board voted to continue the case to a date certain—Nov. 20, 2008—to allow the applicant to hire a geotechnical engineer, obtain DPW review, and arrange a site visit and input from the Critical Area Commission. The board accepted the staff report of findings before continuing the case. The continuation was made to a date certain to avoid re-advertising; the applicant was cautioned that if materials are not ready by Nov. 20 the hearing could be continued again.
The board recorded the continued date and listed follow-ups: geotechnical report, DPW engineering comments, Critical Area Commission site review, and a final planting/mitigation plan if the variance is later approved.
