What'll it be?
Printer-Friendly
Email this Letter
Post a Comment (0)
Every year, we seem to witness homes built in inappropriate locations being flooded, swept away, or sliding down hillsides somewhere in the country.
Fortunately Fauquier County ordinances have precluded construction of homes in floodplains in all zoning districts since 1979.
The outcome of the current consideration to eliminate dwelling density credits for rural RA/RC zoning district properties with floodplains will impact every property owner in the county. This impact may not be felt tomorrow, but it will come eventually, through larger or smaller tax bills.
Based on the county's analysis, there are 3,420 lots 10 acres or larger in the county's RA/RC districts with floodplains and slopes greater than 25 percent.
Subtracting those lots already in conservation easement, 2,754 lots are impacted by this proposal.
The analysis of six example lots presented at the planning commission's work session on June 26 generally shows that each lot would lose one density credit as a result of this proposal, primarily from floodplain impacts.
Some lot owners would lose no credits, others would lose more, based on the specific nature of each lot. It appears the net impact would be in the range of one dwelling per lot, for a total of approximately 2,754 dwellings derived primarily from credit for floodplain that cannot be built on.
If the county paid to extinguish these 2,754 development rights under the Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program this year, at $30,000 per development right, the bill would be $82.6 million.
If these 2,754 development rights resulted in the construction of homes, the cost to expand the county infrastructure — schools, law enforcement, fire and rescue, and so forth — would likely be above $35,000 per dwelling, for a total of at least $96.4 million.
This $35,000 value is based on adjoining county's proffer policies (Loudoun $46,819, Stafford $38,151, Prince William $37,719) which have been updated since Fauquier set its single-family dwelling proffer policy in 2006 ($28,503).
Because these homes would be by-right construction, the county would receive no proffers and have no option but to raise taxes to cover the bill.
The fact that construction of a residence in a floodplain has been prohibited for nearly 30 years leads to a basic question at the heart of the current consideration of RA/RC density credits: If you can't build there, should you get density credit for a dwelling as if you could build there?
Is this "getting something for nothing?" If these property owners get something for nothing, then who pays the county bills caused by their good fortune?
At least this time, the topic of development right credits in RA/RC floodplains and steep slopes is being openly advertised and debated at public hearings.
In 1999, when credit for these areas was changed from 50 percent of floodplains and 30 percent of steep slopes to 100 percent for both, it was neither advertised nor listed as a public hearing agenda item.
The change was buried under a topic listed as changes "In Response to House Bill 2324," which dealt with the elimination of special-exception and conditional-use permits for by-right development under the county ordinances.
We were all slammed with a future tax bill without public discussion.
So what will it be? A commonsense solution that eliminates at least $80 million to $100 million in future taxes for all county property owners and residents? Or owners of 2,700-plus lots retaining development rights for floodplain land that cannot be developed?
If you have an opinion on this issue please contact your planning commissioner and supervisor to let them know what your views are.
Chuck Medvitz
Warrenton
You must be logged in to post a comment.