With regard to the text approved by the Planning Commission, the amended plan language seems inadequate, ambiguous, and doesn't mean very much. There is no correlation between opening the new intermediate school at McLearen and Centreville Roads, in September 1998, and the development of the property. The enrollment numbers used at the Planning Commission meeting did not show current school overcrowding; no one is sure what year's projections were used in the statistics. Another elementary school is not planned in this area of the District for quite some time, if at all.
The "[p]rovision of efficient roadway circulation and singular coordinated access to Thompson and West Ox Roads" needs to be defined, as it is non-specific. Does this include donating the right of way to widen West Ox Road? VDOT does not plan to widen West Ox Road until 2002 at the earliest (from Lawyers Road to Oxon Road). The remaining portion of the road will not be widened until after that year. The internal road connecting Thompson and West Ox Roads will be lined up with one of the Century Oaks entrances as VDOT will not approve a third intersection with Thompson Road. Furthermore, the interparcel road is not shown on the Comprehensive Plan at this time. If the road is going to exist, it needs to be shown on the transportation plan map, and cannot exist solely via the language of the Comprehensive Plan.
The provision of interparcel access to unconsolidated parcels is a right, and not an additional benefit. The substantial buffers need to be specified whether it means 30, 50, or 100 feet. The percentage of tree save areas should also be clarified. One of the problems with Oakton Chase in terms of clearing the land dealt with the fact that there is no longer a County staff arborist. The larger lot size buffer only entails six (6) lots along the northern boundary. What will two acres provide in the way of active recreational facilities? One regulation-size baseball field consumes almost two acres.
Dick Schneider noted that area residents were told that it is not possible to develop the property at R-1, as current owners cannot receive a fair value for their property. The problem seems to be that there are too many layers in the pie; if a large, single builder, not a land developer, purchased the property, it would be easier and more cost-effective to build at R-1. There seems to be a large builder interested in developing the property at R-1 who would purchase the property at a fair price for the current owners.
Although the tax base would increase, the break even point for County services is with homes in the $450,000.00 range as it costs approximately $1.45 for services per dollar. Changing the plan will overburden services already in short supply. The price point for the proposed development has fallen to around $350,000.00.
At this time, nine homeowner associations in the surrounding area are opposed to the plan amendment: Camberleys East and West, Dartmoor, West Ox Estates, Century Oaks, Franklin Farm, Wynwood, Southern Oaks, and Shade Tree. Four of these associations are members of the Sully District Council.
Ralph Rodina made a motion that the Sully District Council Land Use and Transportation Committee takes a stand on the out-of-turn plan amendment. Jeanne Pujanauski seconded. Larry Tessier noted that the issue does not directly affect the entire district. Further, he would like the opportunity to hear from the 16 current parcel owners. Bill Ritchie stated that the Council should not take a stand as it has not done so since it was formed. In addition, County staff recommends disapproval. Glenn Stroup noted that if it was a rezoning issue, we should not be involved; however, it is a plan issue. The vote was five ayes (Hawn, McConn, Pujanauski, Rodina, Schneider), three nays (Hart, Ritchie, Tessier), and one abstention (Stroup). Glenn Stroup made a motion that the Sully District Council Land Use and Transportation Committee recommend to the general membership that the Sully District Council take a position of concern with changing the Comprehensive Plan at this time with an out-of-turn plan amendment. Further, if S95-III-UP1 is approved, the language of the amendment needs to be strengthened and more specific in what is required by the developer. If necessary, the plan amendment can be referred to the Annual Plan Review Task Force. Ralph Rodina seconded. The motion carries unanimously.
Glenn Stroup mentioned that the County is setting up focus groups prior to writing the request for proposal for renewal of the cable franchise. They are interested in citizen input prior to writing the request. Carol Hawn will attempt to set up a meeting when called.
Carol A. Hawn
For the Land Use and Transportation Committee