NOTE: Because the previous link for commissioner and supervisor email addresses just didn’t work, we have gone back to our reliable click-to-send format to get your own email message out – See below.
There is a proposal being voted on which will substantially change our way of life, and our county as a whole. It is the largest proposed removal of Rural Crescent land to date – and if approved, will set a dangerous precedent. Take action NOW to save the Rural Crescent!
Planning Commissioners rely on community input for their decision-making. Add your input to the Planning Commission and to the Board of Supervisors.
Following are full details, provided by the Prince William Conservation Alliance.
Use this easy link to send your message TODAY!
———
|
The Preserve at Long Forest/Mid-County Estates Wants to
Remove 320 Acres from the Rural Crescent Planning Commission Vote Scheduled:
July 29 2020, 7 PM Your Action: Email Planning Commissioners Speak at the public hearing in person or remotely, register here Read more about the Rural Crescent here. Despite multiple failed attempts over the past ten years, developer Classic Concept Homes continues to push their plan to build 118 new homes on 320 acres within the Rural Crescent, more than triple the current allowed density. Located near Sinclair Mill Road and west of Route 234, this plan has been been considered and withdrawn more times that we can remember, and consistently generates significant community outcry. Over the years, local communities have made their continuing support for the Rural Crescent very clear. Public input consistently shows a strong consensus on the importance of maintaining the Rural Crescent. County surveys have shown that that 87% of respondents believe the Rural Crescent is a place to preserve and enhance the rural character of Prince William. Only 8% think it is a holding area for future suburban development. This development proposal does not match the current Comprehensive Plan, nor any other Comprehensive Plans over the past 22 years. Approving increased densities and access to public sewer in the Rural Crescent would set a precedent for leapfrog [sprawl] development across the rural area. In lieu of a monetary contribution, the developer proposes to gift green open space for use as “parkland.” More than half of the “gift” is already protected as perennial and intermittent streams, wetlands, and steep slopes including those not connected to a Resource Preservation Area. Also, if the green open space is to be “permanently protected,” the applicant must show information verifying that a land trust has agreed to hold the easement along with an overview of the easement restrictions. Classic Concept Homes claims that the BOCS previously approved five Comprehensive Plan Amendments for increased densities within the Rural Crescent. However, four of these compensated for the shift in the Rural Crescent boundary by adding as much or more acreage to the Rural Crescent than was removed. One, Avendale, was an anomaly created by the relocation of Vint Hill Road, which separated that parcel from the Rural Crescent and resulted in a resolution reaffirming Supervisors’ support for the Rural Crescent. This current proposal adds no acreage to the Rural Crescent. And why would Supervisors initiate a plan to increase densities and allow access to public sewer in the Rural Crescent before implementing promised incentives intended to ensure the success of Rural Crescent goals? These strategies are intended to help the County avoid the negative economic, social, and environmental characteristics of sprawl development. They include incentives that help landowners protect agricultural land uses, prime farmland soils, and existing green open space. They recognize that, for every dollar we spend expanding infrastructure – roads, schools, etc. – into the countryside, is a dollar we can’t spend to create attractive, sustainable communities near transit nodes. However, to date Supervisors have implemented none of their own recommendations. Without the promised incentives, we’re looking at just one piece of the picture. It’s not possible to equitably evaluate the countywide benefits of the Rural Crescent under these circumstances. If this CPA is approved, it would remove acres from the Rural Crescent, change the urban growth boundary, and set a precedent for other land speculators seeking increased density in the Rural Crescent. Read the staff report for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment here, and the associated rezoning here. We urge the Planning Commission, and the BOCS, to deny both these applications. Send them your own message NOW! Instead, we encourage the BOCS to review and implement incentives to ensure we all reap the benefits offered by protected rural areas. |
| ————
See all recent updates from PWCA here. |