> From: "Dana Gilmour" <dana843@hotmail.com>
> To: <bjenkins@lancova.com>; <epalin@rivnet.net>;
<baigeilich@netscape.net>;
> <lnhill06@rivnet.net>; <wbeauchamp@lancova.com>
> Cc: <chanoew@peoplepc.com>; <jlarson@lancova.com>
> Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 23:30
> Subject: #2 Request for Bay Act Waiver-Kyzer
>
>
> > Subject request is docketed for public hearing on 30 June 2005
> >
> > Ref: Tax Map #35-59 "O"
> >
> > Proposal per publication: "...addition to an existing dwelling therby
> adding
> > approximately 190 square feet of impervious cover inside the seaward
> > component of the 100' protective buffer."
> >
> > Proposal per engineering dimensions on plat:  "16' x 16' room addition
256
> > SF"  ( 35% greater than published notice).
> >
> > This addition is proposed on the waterfront/seaward side of the existing
> > 2032 square foot dwelling, the corner of which would be 38' from the
> water.
> > This would result in a total impervious surface footprint of 3,357
SF--all
> > within the RPA.
> >
> > 1.  The "Statement of Intent" of the county Bay Act Ordinance explicity
> > outlines as one of the purposes of the ordinance is "to prevent any
> increase
> > in pollution."
> >
> > 2.  Sec 3-3(a)  "Development within the RPA is limited to new water
> > dependent facilities...only if there is no increase in the amount of
> > impervious cover and no further encroachment within the RPA..."  Sec 4-6
> For
> > any development or redevelopment...(b)...non-point source pollution load
> > shall be reduced ten percent."
> >
> > 3.  Sec 10-1   "...not intent...to prevent...minor modification or
> > alteration of structures legally existing prior to...September 1, 1990.
> > 10-3(d)(2) on granting exceptions:  "The exception request is not based
on
> > conditions or circumstances that are self-created..."  This proposal
> appears
> > to be "self-created"; can an exception be granted?
> >
> > 4.  At the last BOS meeting a proposed permeable surface driveway was
> turned
> > down for a waiver.  This proposal would seem to be more objectionable on
> its
> > face.
> >
> > An alternative that might be considereed is to construct a room of the
> same
> > dimensions or larger above the existing garage (per drawing it's
22'x24')
> as
> > opposed to increasing the impervious surface within the RPA.
> >
> > Added note:  The existing structure, septic tank and, joint with the
> > adjacent residential property, large drainfield, are all within the
> seaward
> > side of the 100' RPA on George's Cove of Dymer Creek.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Dana J. Gilmour, 1849 Ocran Road, White Stone, VA 22578-2225,
> > dana843@hotmail.com
> >
> >
>