|
|
|
| Tue, Sep. 07 - - Mobile - RSS | ALERTS | | |
| YOUR TOWN: Caroline | Culpeper | King George | Fredericksburg | Orange | Spotsylvania | Stafford | Westmoreland | |
|
|
Stafford approves development district
Stafford supervisors approve Urban Service Area mapDate published: 12/4/2008 BY JONAS BEALS In the end, it may have been a simple case of Urban Services Area fatigue. "We've been working on this thing for three months," Stafford Supervisor Mark Dudenhefer said. "I'm sick of chewing on it." His fellow supervisors seemed to share the sentiment, although last-minute changes were suggested, and most noted that more changes are likely to come. "This is about as close to consensus as we're going to get," Supervisor Joe Brito said before a vote Tuesday night. Supervisors approved the admittedly imperfect USA boundary map 6-1, with Bob Woodson voting against. It varied only slightly from the one recommended by the Planning Commission and excluded areas scheduled for development with public water and sewer--parcels like the Sherwood Forest farm on State Route 3, which the Silver Cos. is developing as a residential subdivision. Philosophically, the USA is the area of the county slated for the densest development. Practically, it is where public water and sewer service will be available. Supervisors have been pushing and pulling the boundary into shape for some time now. There have been a number of minor adjustments, but the major question has been what to do with developments that were planned and approved with the understanding they would have county utilities. Last month, supervisors directed County Attorney Joe Howard to craft language that would allow those developments to retain water and sewer rights even if they are outside of the USA boundary. Essentially, it would be a "grandfather" clause to alleviate the threat of legal action. Howard did just that, adding language to the ordinance that would give developers a chance to convince staff their projects should continue. "It creates an administrative process in lieu of litigation," he explained. Board members were uneasy with the proposed language and felt the process wasn't clear enough to solve the problem. "It really opens up Pandora's box," Supervisor Harry Crisp said. "It could lead to a lot of problems." The board removed the grandfather clause before approving the boundary. Lawsuits are a likely side-effect of any ordinance that affects land use. Now that the supervisors have swallowed hard and adopted a contracted USA, they are almost certain to face a courtroom challenge. "My concern," Supervisor Paul Milde said, "is that we pass this and we get sued. We've already been told in writing that we will be sued, in some cases." Howard verified that, advising that property-owners will indeed seek litigation because of the decision, and defense could be difficult. From a financial perspective, the county may have to pay for outside counsel to defend the USA. Still, most supervisors were willing to accept the risk. Aside from relieving frustration, their decision creates a baseline for the board and planning commission to work from as they complete the Comprehensive Plan. Even though the debate over the USA will continue, the vote made a statement. "We can't make decisions based on the threat of a lawsuit," Crisp said. Jonas Beals: 540/368-5036
sooooooooo
(posted by
local_boy
, Dec. 4, 2008 7:51 am)
We pass something, that we know we'll have to defend in court, hire outside counsel $$$$$$ and will probably lose.
Wow, in these times that make so much sense...NOT!!!!
|
 |
||
|
||
