Mixed messages

 

What will the next few years bring to Centerville?

    On July 25, the Goochland planning commission voted 3-1 (Matt Brewer District 2 was absent) to recommend the latest version of the Centerville Small area plan be used to amend the county’s comprehensive land use plan. Commission Chair Tom Rockecharlie, District 5, was in dissent.

The message sent by this vote, and staff comments, signal that they know best, and it’s time to move along. Nothing to see here. Someone seems to have decided that the county will be ruled, not governed.

Everyone is tired of this process. Apologies to GOMM readers about many posts on the subject, but getting this right is important. Despite repeated contentions that the proposed amendments do not change anything, loopholes that hide in the fine print of the comp plan will be used by land use attorneys to justify approval of projects in the gray areas. The land use map is the foundation for zoning ordinances.

The latest version of the Centerville small area plan, crafted by Timmons Group, using citizen input gathered by the previous consultant, was presented to the community in May as a finished product on its way to final approval. It has large scale development west of Rt. 288 throughout the village core, which was expanded west of Manakin Road. It is far too specific about density, building height, and setbacks. Comp plans are supposed to be general in nature to allow developers flexibility, which, in theory, would result in a “better” project.

The July 25 vote came after 75 minutes of public hearing, during which several neighborhood groups voiced opposition to components of the proposal and suggested specific and modest changes. (A video and transcript of the meeting is available on the county website https://www.goochlandva.us/ under “watch county meetings” planning commission. It’s worth your time.)

The comments fell on deaf ears except for Rockecharlie who supported some tweaks proposed by residents of the Sycamore Creek neighborhood. They strongly opposed extension of the village core west of Manakin Road, and inclusion of lodging. Rockecharlie did not address changes advocated by other groups.

John Myers, District 1, who participated virtually, said “we can’t make everybody happy. We’ve worked on this a long time and have a pretty good plan,” which seemed to sum up the attitude of other commissioners.

There were some head scratching moments:

·       Harry Bawa, who owns the land behind Satterwhite’s, said that what he plans to build there, believed to be a hotel, will be very nice. Bawa seemed unaware that parcel was zoned in 2009 with extensive proffers allowing only a shopping center. To build anything else on that land, he must go through the entire rezoning process. Does this means he intends to ignore county zoning rules, or has not had detailed discussions with planning staff?

·       The owners of the Sycamore Creek Golf Course said that golf courses have useful lives and when theirs is no longer economically feasible—happily not yet—the land adjacent to the Sycamore Creek neighborhood will be donated to the county. This is good news. Why was this information not shared before the 11^th hour in the small area plan revisions? Staff had to know this from the outset.

·       When asked how the proposed plan differs from that in place and what makes it better, staff tap danced in reply. The new plan, Principal Planner Tom Coleman said, will put more “tools in the toolbox” to ensure proper setbacks and provide for things like parks and a “mixture of housing types” which could result in a light version of the dystopian mess around Wegman’s. “It is intended to accomplish different things,” said Coleman with no elaboration. (A few years ago, the county worked with a consultant to fix the dysfunction that plagued local government. One of the strategies was that all county policies should be explainable in a single sentence clearly articulated by staff.)

·       Roads in the recommended plan still include the connector between Manakin and Hocket Roads parallel to 250 that has been on the land use map for decades. Residents of Oak Grove Estates, which has a deeded easement that this road would bisect, and the Parke at Saddle Creek, who do not want through traffic in their neighborhood, asked that it be removed from the plan. This road will not work when the Hockett Road realignment is finished, so it should be removed. Connecting Three Chopt Road to 250 through Mills Road in Bellview Gardens, is still in the mix. The good news, if there is any, is that these roads rarely get built. So, take them off the map.

·       Residents of Oak Grove Estates, the Parke at Centerville, and Readers Branch asked that “greenways” through wetlands, mostly on private property, adjoining their neighborhoods be removed because they would be a nuisance rather than amenity. The consultant contended that greenways “at a high conceptual level” addressed dearth of recreational opportunities.

·       Robust opposition to “lodging,” even appropriately scaled, west of Ashland Road was ignored. Even if lodging is three or fewer stories, it could be a nuisance adjoining a neighborhood. There are no gracious older homes in Centerville that could be repurposed for this use. Everything will be new construction.

·       Lodging west of Ashland Road fell into the final plan like pigeon droppings on a statue. Repeated requests for an explanation of this inclusion have fallen on deaf ears, leading to the assumption that “offline” discussions with landowners resulted in suggesting “lodging” throughout the village core.

·       “Mixed use,” read high density dwelling units, with perhaps a bit of commercial, is permitted in the entire village. The tired and misleading phase “live, work, play” was thrown out as justification. “Rooftops bring retail” was also part of the buzzword buffet. We have only to look at West Broad Village to see how disingenuous and outdated these phrases are. The term transparency, was in short supply.

·       Concern that a deluge of new homes—there was precious little discussion of commercial and economic development—will overwhelm the county’s ability to provide core services of law enforcement, fire-rescue response, and education, will be addressed in the zoning process, or something.  This could force an increase in real estate tax rates for the entire county, and hurt those in rural areas most, curtailing agricultural pursuits. Homes consume more in government services than they generate in real estate tax.

·       More detail was added to the notion of “transition zones” between mixed and commercial uses and neighborhoods, but elevations showing massive buildings “screened” from homes by a tree or two was not comforting to those who live on the edge of existing neighborhoods. There will be transition zones “as wide as I64” around Bellview Gardens and Sycamore Creek staff said.

The village plan, in place for decades, was created to absorb growth pressures and protect rural areas from sprawl. As presented, residential density along Manakin and Rockville Roads could add hundreds of dwelling units that overrun village boundaries while cornfields in land use taxation flourish at the intersection of Ashland and Broad Street Roads.

Land use is never easy. An unintended consequence of this process has been an erosion of public trust in county government. Concerned citizens devoted many hours to this process, delving deeply into land use matters with the expectation that the final product would be a framework for growth to enhance the community and generate a return on investment for landowners and developers, who will fund the changes.

Growth is like fire. Controlled it provides useful energy. Unchecked, it devours everything in its path.

The Board of Supervisors will hold the final public hearing on the Centerville Small Area Plan on Monday, August 7 beginning at 6 p.m.