The Goose Creek Outlook property is located south of Dulles Greenway, on both sides of Sycolin Road (Route 625), along the east banks of Goose Creek.
Protestors held signs to save Goose Creek from a housing development project on March 16.
Supervisors Sylvia Glass (D-Broad Run) and Juli Briskman (D-Algonkian) maintained their support the project — which had been approved during a recent board meeting — but the measure ultimately fell short in a 6-2-1 vote.
Supervisor Caleb Kershner (R-Catoctin) abstained from the vote Tuesday.
Supervisor Mike Turner (D-Ashburn) requested the board reconsider the application after he and the board voted 5-4 earlier this month to move forward with the development.
“The applicant has proposed strong mitigation measures that arguably address possible damage to Goose Creek,” Turner said.
“But even if every mitigation feature of the applicant’s plan works perfectly and forever, the very best we as a community could hope for is that we would do no further harm to an already impaired stream — and if something didn’t work as planned, the damage could be significant and permanent,” he said.
On March 2, the Ashburn supervisor voted in favor of the project along with supervisors Tony Buffington (R-Blue Ridge), Briskman, Glass and Kershner, favoring Goose Creek Overlook LLC’s proposed plan that included 75 attached multifamily affordable housing units (AHU) and walking trails.
The 75 units was over the 18 units that would be required through Zoning Ordinance ADU minimums, and commitments to pedestrian access.
The amount of dedicated civic space, floodplain encroachments and improvements proposed in the “no build” buffer were some of the concerns that split the supervisors.
Additionally, the board was troubled that the proposal did not meet the definition of suburban neighborhood place type outlined in the county’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan.
Chairwoman Phyllis Randall (D-At Large), Vice Chairman Koran Saines (D-Sterling) and supervisors Matt Letourneau (R-Dulles) and Kristen Umstattd (D-Leesburg) all kept their votes to deny the application.
If the board had voted to approve the project, supervisors would have permitted the rezoning of 46 acres of land currently zoned R-1 (Single Family Residential) to the PD-H4 (Planned Development – Housing 4). The property is located south of Dulles Greenway, on both sides of Sycolin Road (Route 625), along the east banks of Goose Creek.
County staff said the proposal was consistent with the county comprehensive plan in terms of unit types and density during the March 2 business meeting.
However, the application did not fully address policies relating to mixed usage or environmental impacts.
Staff said the Planning Commission’s recommendation to provide an additional acre for outdoor civic uses was not included in the proposal. The applicant also did not remove the proposed active recreation areas from the major floodplains and previous parking area from the “no build” area associated with Goose Creek reservoir protection area.
Shortly before the board meeting, protestors gathered outside of the county government center urging the board to vote against the housing project near the Goose Creek. True North data center sits immediately opposite of the proposed housing development site.
A petition against the project has received more than 4,500 signatures including 3,000 from Loudoun County, according to Leesburg resident Olivia Lewis.
Ted Lewis, who identified himself as a geotechnical engineer, expressed concern with the developer’s plans — specifically to level the site — that may adversely impact the environment and residents.
“I applaud the supervisor for bringing this rezoning back for another vote as it demonstrates your listening to your constituents,” Ted Lewis said.
“I know it’s not easy to do, but it is the right thing to do,” he said. “The vote to defeat this rezoning will send a message to the county that environmental issues have a voice.”
Julia Holcomb said the housing problem in Loudoun is so big that the applicant proposed 75 units which would’ve reduced the number of cost burdened renters greatly, but it would come with a cost.
“It’s a devil’s bargain — more houses, more asphalt, more cars, more sewage,” Holcomb said. “The loss of what we cannot replace for [an additional] 0.5 percent more houses.”
Glass said it’s frustrating to hear the concerns people have with the housing shortage in Loudoun.
She said because there is a shortage, people are outbidding one another for rentals and leaving others to continue struggling for homes they can’t find or afford.
“This is frustrating because this is why I came here,” Glass said. “I came here to make sure that we have affordable housing for those who want to live here, want to live near their jobs, who want to send their children to good schools.”
Briskman, who again voted to approve, said “When I hear ‘I’m in support of affordable housing, but not here,’ all I can think is that it’s NIMBYism [not in my back yard] wrapped in environmentalism.”
Kershner abstained from the vote because he said neither decision is good, especially because the developer can build homes under the by-right development without the need for board approval.
The developer — if they went that route — would also not be required to offer some of the environmental protections and proposals like walking trails outlined in the application.
“I have it on pretty good authority that this is going to go by-right,” Kershner said.
“You’re going to have the exact same footprint dug up and trees destroyed and nothing replaced,” he said. “I don’t think people who came to the public [meeting] understand what’s going to happen.”
Turner said he plans to explore ways to protect the creek from impacts of by-right development.
“Over the course of the past year, I think I lost sight of the forest for the trees— literally,” Turner said. “I’ve certainly done a disservice to the applicant, but refusing to admit my mistake would have done a far greater disservice to my constituents and the citizens of Loudoun County.”