F.C. Council Mulls Sweeping Zoning Changes, New Restrictions on Residential Development

Billed as a "zoning summit," members of the Falls Church City Council and Planning Commission met in a joint work session Tuesday night to hear a two-hour presentation of proposed sweeping re-write of the City's zoning ordinance, impacting everything from tree and historic preservation to limits on residential housing size and impervious surfaces and parking requirements for businesses.

Among the more draconian proposed new measures were criminal, in addition to civil, penalties for violating the historic preservation ordinance, and a strict new limit on the size of houses on city lots, aimed at deterring development of so-called "McMansions," new homes that some critics consider oversized for the lots upon which they're built.

The proposals were brought forth at Tuesday's "zoning summit" came from the City Planning Department under the direction of Elizabeth Friel. They constituted not formal recommendations, she said, but "direction" for the Council and Planners as they revamp the "currently outdated" City zoning ordinance.

She stressed that a proposed ambitious schedule of deliberations aimed at completing both the zoning rewrite and adoption of an updated Comprehensive Plan by Christmas should include opportunities for public input.

Some of the proposed changes, she said, are aimed at incorporating compliance with the Chesapeake Bay Preservation and Tripps Run floodplain update measures already enacted by the Council. In the case of the Cheseapeake Bay provisions, they apply to new limits on "impervious surfaces" on newly-developed land throughout the City, since the entire City sits in the Bay's watershed area.

Friel proposed the Council consider reducing the amount of any lot that can be covered with impervious surfaces (that water cannot soak through) from 35% to 30%. This is aimed at limiting the amount of water carried off during rains in the City's storm drains, where it passes untreated into the bay and can even, during flooding, mix with waste water overflows.

Measures such as gravel, instead of concrete, driveways can help homeowners stay within the more stringent proposed limits, she said.

But Friel suggested marrying Chesapeake Bay provisions with anti-residential infill provisions to also place new, stricter limits on the size of homes as a percentage of lot size, from 25% to 20%.

In reality, she said, average single family homes in the City cover only 15% of their lot sizes currently, and that 20% would usually constitute a very large home.

Mayor Dan Gardner expressed his support for this measure, noting that many new homes are overbuilt for their lots. "These are out-of-whack homes," he said, citing cases of large homes recently built on Highland Avenue as examples.

On the other hand, Planning Commissioner Suzanne Fauber suggested that maybe large homes mark "a natural progression" toward a residential community more like Northwest Washington. "Is that bad?," she asked. In that case, she said, "it would be the smaller, older homes that become a reverse `out-of-whack.'"

Council member Sam Mabry clarified the distinction between the impervious surfaces policy and the home size restriction, noting they're distinct policies with distinct objectives. Deferring to City Attorney Roy Thorpe to comment on the appropriateness of the proposed policies, Thorpe remarked that similar methods are used in other jurisdictions, and that Falls Church's would be considered "modest."

Friel conceded that public input to date, a total of about 50 responses, ran about two-to-one against more restrictions on use of residential properties.

Council member David Snyder said he was concerned for the perception that limiting development on private land might limit a taxpaying landowner's ability to extract the true value from his property. "Many who've been here a long time might think it is not fair to change the rules now after 30 years," he said.

But Mayor Gardner noted the "issues facing us now weren't here 30 years ago. We need to look for ways to be flexible in the implementation of these new policies."

It was also proposed the Council look at changes to its parking requirements in the business zones, actually reducing the requirements of spaces per business and emphasizing canopies of trees over bushes and shrubs for landscaping, both to maximize space and for its aesthetic impact.

Planning Commission chair Peter Holran noted that his group has been routinely providing waivers to businesses on parking already, recognizing that the current City ordinance requires too much. Citing the case of the new Eckerd Drug store on W. Broad, allowing too much parking can constitute a "waste of valuable land."

Friel emphasized the need for working out "shared parking" arrangements between businesses. "There has to be a paradigm shift with business owners," she said. "Right now our businesses are extremely territorial, even if with reason, which has led to a lot of the towing problems we've had."

On the issue of historic preservation, the Planning Department proposed moving up the date for properties that would fall under the ordinance from 1910 to 1930, according to Debbie Gee.

That would add 122 new properties, about twice the current number, to the City's "protected" list but, more than this, it's proposed to add stiffer penalties for violating or ignoring the ordinance, including criminal ones.

"The goal is to add considerable muscle to historical preservation," Gee said.

Adding to the City's stock of open space will also be addressed by proposed zoning changes, with Vice Mayor Marty Meserve noting that the City is currently "at the low end of normal" in terms of its percentage of total open space.

Moving all this forward on the timelines proposed by the Planning Department "is very ambitious," said Mayor Dan Gardner, especially given vacation schedules in August for the Council, the Planners and the City staff.