A Virginia Supreme Court panel rejected a McLean developer’s request to uphold a 1971 residential zoning designation for the 4,000-acre environmentally sensitive Crow’s Nest peninsula.
K&M Properties believes it is entitled to the earlier classification, which allows more homes per lot than the current rural rules, because a previous owner recorded final plats for the property several years before the county downzoned it.
The Board of Zoning Appeals and the Stafford County Circuit Court have both said too much time has passed to honor the previous zoning. But K&M’s attorney, Clark Leming, said the documents on file should retain development rights for the property, no matter how many years elapse.
“Vesting is something that, like a covenant, runs with the property,” he said.
Leming said he will appeal the panel’s decision to the full Virginia Supreme Court by Jan. 11. And his client will continue to pursue other development approvals.
K&M has already filed a preliminary subdivision plan for the 3,230 acres not included in the current litigation. They have asked for 688 homes, which is allowed under by-right law.
The plans filed by a previous owner more than 30 years ago dealt with a small section of the tract, now known as Crow’s Nest Harbour. It included 8,000 homes, two golf courses, four marinas, an airport, a convention center, a commercial area and schools. Those hopes were never realized because the original company went bankrupt.
But if the Virginia Supreme Court were to rule in the company’s favor, it could be allowed to build many more units per acre on the entire Crow’s Nest peninsula, Leming said.
K&M, however, wouldn’t necessarily use all of the added land for more homes.
“Even if 1971 density were reinstated that, in and of it self, does not mean the property would be developed in that fashion or would be developed at all. It just comes down to what legal rights they have to that property,” Leming said.
In addition to the Virginia Supreme Court setbacks last week, the preliminary subdivision plan has met its share of squabbles, as well.
Aquia residents Linda and Jack Fellers have asked the Board of Zoning appeals to examine the proposal’s compliance with the county’s Chesapeake Bay requirements. The request halts all discussion of the plan until the board can hear the case at its Feb. 28 meeting.
In response, Leming has asked the county circuit court to reject the Fellers’ appeal, returning it to the Planning Commission for review. That hearing is scheduled for Friday at 1 p.m.
But David Croteau, a member of Save Crow’s Nest, said he doesn’t agree with the developer’s argument that vesting of some type is important to the ultimate preservation of the peninsula.
“They are looking for vesting because it gives them the right to develop Crow’s Nest,” he said. “They want as many cards to play as possible.”
In the meantime, Save Crow’s Nest activists pledged at last night’s Stafford Board of Supervisors meeting that they would be using a “report card” system in the coming months to grade representatives on whether their votes are consistent with efforts to save the peninsula. Those who vote favorably will receive a stuffed blue heron doll. Those who vote unfavorably will receive a plastic dump truck. A tally of each award will be kept and distributed to the public.
To reach MEGHANN COTTER:
540/374-5434
mcotter@freelancestar.com