|
- |
Stafford County will offer a developer a little more than $27 million for Crow's Nest, a county official said yesterday.
That's the amount the 3,230-acre tract between Potomac and Accokeek creeks in eastern Stafford was appraised for in January by a firm hired by the county.
But an attorney for K&M Properties, which owns Crow's Nest, said his client believes the land is worth $60 million. The McLean developer is going to court in a bid to win approval of its plans to build 688 homes on the site.
The property is home to some rare plant and animal species. The company's efforts to develop the land have repeatedly met opposition from activists who want to see it preserved.
Stafford supervisors agreed Tuesday to make an offer for the land, but did not disclose the amount.
The $27 million figure was reported on the Web site of Save Crows Nest, one of the groups fighting to protect the land. A county official confirmed that number to The Free Lance-Star yesterday, but asked not to be identified for fear of jeopardizing negotiations.
Clark Leming, an attorney for K&M, said the company is confident it can prove the land is worth much more than the county is offering.
Lee Butzine, an accredited senior appraiser for the American Society of Appraisers, said it is not unusual for raw land in a dynamic market to be appraised at conflicting values. A lot depends on who hired the appraiser, he said.
Appraisers consider a property's highest and best use and project the cash flow that would come back from developing it.
"In any appraisal, the best way you can get a value is to find very similar sales," he said.
But large rural tracts usually don't have many comparable properties nearby. K&M's plan is the largest subdivision, area-wise, Stafford County has ever reviewed.
Despite the gap in prices, Aquia Supervisor Paul Milde, whose district is home to Crow's Nest, is confident the environmentally-sensitive peninsula will be saved.
"This gives [K&M] an opportunity to start the process, if they choose to do that," he said.
The Board of Supervisors is looking at multiple funding options in preparation for negotiations. The county has already set aside $10 million, the state has promised $9.5 million and the Northern Virginia Conservation Trust has obtained a grant for $500,000.
Milde said he has talked with more than one developer interested in contributing money to the effort in exchange for being allowed to build more homes than zoning laws permit on land they already own.
The ideal density swap would fall within the county's land-use plan and have little impact on services, he said.
"We're getting a few that fit those requirements," Milde said. "It is all about how many units they want."
Milde said supervisors want to pay K&M a fair price, but may consider condemning the land if an agreement can't be reached.
"It is a last resort, but we certainly won't take it off the table," he said.
The Planning Commission denied K&M's subdivision plan in January, saying it did not meet county code. But K&M has appealed that decision to Circuit Court, claiming the county's decision resulted from unusual--and incorrect--interpretations of the subdivision ordinance.
The company is determined to win approval of its plan, even if it later decides to sell the property, Leming said yesterday. Securing approval for the subdivision application will provide a better idea of what the property is worth, he said.
The appeal points out that several supervisors and planning commissioners have been active in the effort to save Crow's Nest. Leming argues that K&M was not given the opportunity to go through the subdivision application process like other companies.
"There is a very definite issue about the grounds on which the preliminary plan was denied and the process used," he said.
The Planning Department publicly recommended approval of K&M's plan three times, but reversed its stand the night the application was to be reviewed by the Planning Commission.
In its appeal, K&M also questions whether the Planning Commission made a decision within the required 60 days. County code says an application is automatically approved if the Planning Commission doesn't meet the deadline.
The developer argues the 60 days began Oct. 18, when the last fees and substantive revisions were submitted. The appeal says the minor procedural and administrative changes made after that should not affect the timing.
On K&M's clock, time ran out Jan. 19. The Planning Commission did not act until Jan. 25.
But Planning Director Jeff Harvey said his office received the final amended version of the application Dec. 1, giving the Planning Commission until March 5 to make a decision.
County Attorney Joe Howard said the appeal is not unexpected, but the decisions of the Planning Department and Planning Commission were legal.
"[The preliminary plan] didn't meet the code requirements," Howard said.
To reach MEGHANN COTTER:
Email: mcotter@freelancestar.com
