Possible changes to Arlington rules on lot coverage could affect how large swaths of the county can be developed — and also make numerous existing homes out of step with zoning regulations.
County Board members on Feb. 25 directed staff to begin preparatory work to study if it makes sense to change how permeable surfaces on a lot are calculated.
Any changes to be considered, county leaders say, will be designed to emphasize the county’s efforts to protect tree canopy and reduce threats of flooding. But potentially, they also could limit future development opportunities in many places.
Currently, some barriers to water seeping into the ground rather than running off — including patios, walkways, playground areas and decks — are not always counted when zoning officials calculate a parcel’s impermeable surface. Using photo-imaging systems, however, it is now easier to calculate with relative accuracy the entire impermeable surface of any lot.
In their Feb. 25 discussion, county leaders — elected and staff — said the initiative is not a solution in search of a problem, but an effort to better align zoning regulations with environmental concerns that now are a key component of county planning efforts.
Using the total impervious surface of a lot represents “a better path forward,” said Anthony Fusarelli, the county government’s planning director
Counting the footprint of a home coupled with ancillary features like patios and walkways, some newly constructed homes in Arlington sit on lots with upwards of 70% impervious surface.
Yet they are still able to meet current limits for lot coverage, which range from 25% to 53% percent depending on zoning category and other factors.
The effort would focus on single-family lots zoned R5 to R20, and possibly could be extended to townhouses, Fusarelli said.
The initiative long has been sought by some, but feared by others.
That split was felt not just among the public, but on the Board dais, as well. County Manager Mark Schwartz acknowledged that in the past, “there was not necessarily consensus [among Board members] about how to approach this.”
For now, the five current members of the Board seem fine to start the process.
“I’m glad we’re getting started,” said Matt de Ferranti.
But almost in the same breath, de Ferranti said trying to balance environmental concerns against property rights could prove to be “very, very difficult.”
The change might irk developers, as it potentially could limit their ability to maximize amenities on a lot. For those who own existing homes, the potential exists that the regulations would result in “non-conforming lots,” de Ferranti said.
Plenty of homes in Arlington already sit on lots deemed non-conforming under current zoning regulations, with no adverse day-to-day impact on homeowners.
But, as with new homes, what is placed on a lot might have to be brought into conformance with new zoning rules if owners want to expand or redevelop.
Changing the regulatory framework also could require more staffing for enforcement, Schwartz said.
“I would not rule out the need for additional resources,” he said.
Currently, “we do not have enough staff” to go out searching for violations of lot-coverage requirements, Schwartz said.
Fusarelli said his office would be able to come back to the Board meeting in May to provide an update and perhaps set a timetable community engagement and a draft report.
Board member Susan Cunningham several times pushed for a more definitive staff answer to how long the process to develop new policies might take. She noted that last year came and went with only limited forward movement on the initiative.
Her doggedness to pin down staff seemed to get under the skin of Board Chair Takis Karantonis, who said there was no way to know the timeline now.
Come May, “we will see what are the next steps,” he said.
