Stafford’s Slow Motion Suicide

Developers of two proposed mixed-use projects in Stafford County have withdrawn their rezoning applications. I shudder for the county’s long-term future. We could be witnessing the formation of what will evolve in 30 to 40 years’ time, into one of Virginia’s worst suburban slums.

Rob Gollahon, project developer of Stafford Town Station, had envisioned a town center-style community with clustered buildings, narrow streets and a blend of commercial and residential uses. The 1,600-home project would have provided Stafford County with $50 million in proffers toward road improvements, a library and other amenities. Now it’s being planned as a routine subdivision of 144 single-family houses on three-acre lots. Gollahon would not comment on his decision, reports the Free Lance-Star.

Meanwhile, the developer of Leeland Station, a proposed mixed-use project built around a Virginia Railway Express station, also has withdrawn his zoning application, writes Kafia Hosh. Bacon’s Rebellion had profiled Leeland Station in “Curse of the ‘D’ Word” a year ago. Only a single mixed-use project, The Towne Center of Aquia, is working its way through the Stafford planning department.

In an ideal world, Stafford wouldn’t have to deal with development pressure. Increased housing along with the retail and commercial space to support it, would be built closer to the urban core of the Washington New Urban Region, closer to where most of the jobs and existing infrastructure are located. In an ideal world, Stafford wouldn’t have to deal with surging population and traffic and attendant strain on public finances, and its citizens wouldn’t have to confront the tough choices they never asked to make.

But in the world that is, Stafford lies squarely in the path of growth. The Northern Virginia real estate crash or a slowdown in technology-driven employment growth might relieve the pressure for a few years, but there is no escaping the inevitable. Stafford citizens need to to visualize what their county will look like when developed from end to end via by-right development as low-density, cul-de-sac subdivisions and strip shopping centers, all strung along country roads in disconnected pods — with no nucleus, no community center, and no financial contribution from developers whatsoever.

Fairfax, Loudoun and Prince William Counties, as dysfunctional as they are in a regional context, at least have patches of territory that work well on a micro level. But Stafford may well emerge as Virginia’s poster child for dysfunctional human settlement patterns: an entire county that evolved as an amorphous, auto-centric blob. When the newness of today’s construction wears off in 30 to 40 years, Stafford will be saddled with a high cost of public services, inadequate and aging infrastructure, and a paucity of districts worth preserving, removating or reinvesting in.

The only people who will choose to live in such a place will be people who lack the means to live anywhere else.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

34 responses to “Stafford’s Slow Motion Suicide”

  1. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Question 1:

    is Greenfield mixed-use development in which most of the residents will commute to NoVa jobs on a maxed I-95 AND which – most of it’s retail employees will not earn enough to actually live in that mixed-use and thus will have to commute from outside of the mixed-use to their jobs in the mixed-use….

    Is that doing what mixed-use says that it is doing? Is it Smart Growth?

    Question #2:

    what about the existing thousands of acres ALREADY zoned for by-right subdivisions?

    The proposition being put to Staffords’ citizens is:

    1. – let’s ADD the high-density mixed use development to the other land that will be developed at the same time….

    2. – let’s pretend that none of this development will add more traffic to the existed roads already maxed out.

    I think SOME residents might go along with the high-density if the county would downzone the other land that is STILL developable as conventional subdivisions.

    AND – a REAL live plan was developed to deal with the inevitable traffic consequences.

    and I cannot abide the assertion that folks will not have any other place to live…

    Let’s just be honest. The folks who move to Stafford can afford a place to live in NoVa… but what they want is “more” place for their money.

    These are not folks who will live in tent cities if Stafford denies high-density mixed use.

    These are, in fact, folks that make twice as much in salary as folks who actually do live and work in Stafford.

    At the end of the day – the proposition being put to Stafford citizens is essentially to “suck it up” and they’re being told that their choices are “bad” and “worse”.. so take the “bad”.

    I’ll fully admit .. that the citizens who are saying ‘no’ are exactly the same ones who CAME before and now want the door closed.

    But that’s not the point.

    The point is – how does the development community, the county planners and the Smart Growth folks propose to deal with the citizens concerns?

    You .. CAN .. condemn them for being hypocritical NIMBYs.. but that won’t achieve anything other than to encourage them to be even more resolute…

    and in the end.. presenting them with the “suck it up ..bad and worse choices” … well, as long as we have a Democracy… those citizens are going to out any BOS that votes for denser land development without ensuring that the concerns of citizens are also delt with.

    I think THIS is the challenge.

    I don’t think any planner, any developer or any Smart Growth advocate has ANY business advocating dense mixed-use development without addressing the impacts… that’s hypocritical also.

  2. Anonymous Avatar

    In an ideal world, Stafford wouldn’t have to deal with development pressure (they would just put it someplace else an dhave someone else deal with the propblems). Increased housing along with the retail and commercial space to support it, would be built closer to the urban core of the Washington New Urban Region, closer to where most of the jobs and (inadequate, needing to be rebuilt, and most expensive to rebuild) infrastructure are located. In an ideal world, Stafford wouldn’t have to deal with surging population (we would prohibit people from happening) and traffic and attendant strain on public finances, and its citizens wouldn’t have to confront the tough choices they (made and now don’t want anybody else) to make.

    RH

  3. Anonymous Avatar

    “Let’s just be honest. The folks who move to Stafford can afford a place to live in NoVa… but what they want is “more” place for their money.

    These are not folks who will live in tent cities if Stafford denies high-density mixed use.

    These are, in fact, folks that make twice as much in salary as folks who actually do live and work in Stafford.”

    Agree

    So who will actually move to Stafford and live in these high-density mixed use areas

    Isn’t that what people are choosing to move away from

    The free market is speaking loud and clear

    So the million dollar question becomes where is the balacne between personal choice and the “common good”

    -NMM

  4. Jim Bacon Avatar

    NMM, Please elaborate, in connection to the withdrawal of the two rezoning requests, in what way is the free market speaking loud and clear?

  5. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    NMM has an excellent question.

    Why would a guy with a job in NoVa who could only afford a small place in NoVa move down to live in a small place in Stafford?

    People who move to Stafford want a home on a cul-de-sac with a front and back yard.

    Another question is… what happens to the “market” for mixed-use in Stafford once HOT lanes also become part of the cost equation?

    Would the cost of a mixed-use place in Stafford COMBINED with HOT Lane TOLLS.. EQUAL to the cost of a mixed-use place in NoVa without (or with much lower) HOT lane tolls?

  6. Anonymous Avatar

    “Fairfax, Loudoun and Prince William Counties, as dysfunctional as they are in a regional context, at least have patches of territory that work well on a micro level..”

    How do you define dysfunctional?
    How do you know what “works” on a micro level? Even if it all “worked” on a micro level it might still be dysfunctional on a regional level.

    Fairfax has excellent schools and excellent salaries: how is that dysfunctional?

    ——————————

    “Another question is… what happens to the “market” for mixed-use in Stafford once HOT lanes also become part of the cost equation?”

    This has been studied many times. Economists find that those that drive to qualify ARE making rational economic choices. Adding HOT lanes to the mix may change the radius, but it won’t change the basic situation.

    ——————————

    “in connection to the withdrawal of the two rezoning requests, in what way is the free market speaking loud and clear?”

    I guess it depends on why they are being withdrawn. Maybe they didn’t have enough interest in early sales. Maybe thier plans depend on market prices for the homes on a cul-de-sac with a yard front and back being above a certain salary threshold. Or maybe they decided the county was too difficult to play with.

    RH

  7. Anonymous Avatar

    “…Prince William County is feeling the ill effects of the housing slowdown in that the drop in County revenues has harmed the ability of the County to pay for planned road improvements.

    This article is important for two reasons. First, it demonstrates the important role that housing plays in local economies across the Commonwealth. Contrary to the propaganda emanating from some quarters, housing is a driving contributor to local tax coffers. After all, if was really a drag, local officials would be celebrating housing’s downturn, and none seem to really be doing so.

    Second, this article makes you wonder how much the hostile anti-housing policies that have been advanced by certain elected officials in Prince William County have contributed to the mess in which the County now finds itself.”

    http://www.growthisgood.info/

  8. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “Contrary to the propaganda emanating from some quarters, housing is a driving contributor to local tax coffers. After all, if was really a drag, local officials would be celebrating housing’s downturn, and none seem to really be doing so.”

    this is a joke right?

    Prince William has been considering proffers of 50K per house.

    Why? The answer is obvious.

    Prince William and other pro-growth places are operating on a Ponzi scheme.

    They NEED the growth to generate enough funding to pay for the infrastructure for the houses built previously.

    The whole scheme melts down if growth slows down or stops…

    That’s exactly why.. the roads bonds will fail if growth slows down.

    it’s a legalized ponzi scheme.

    This is why the more growth you have.. the farther behind you fall on the infrastructure.

  9. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    http://www.growthisgood.info/

    a BLOG…

    “Tyler Craddock
    I am the Director of Public and Government Affairs for the Home Building Association of Richmond, a trade association representing over 600 member firms in the Richmond metro area.”

    I don’t understand.

    Growth is inevitable and necessary but by refusing to acknowledge the need AND the responsibility for maintaining it such that a reasonable quality of life is maintained….

    the pro-growth folks .. actually sabotage .. growth… they empower and accelerate anti-growth sentiment…

    and their “solution” to this is to essentially figure out how to force localities (with State and Federal laws) to accept growth no matter what.

    In other words, the same government that they blame for being intrusive .. they want to handcuff localities and their citizens from being able to say no to growth if it does not mitigate it’s impacts.

    dumb…

  10. Anonymous Avatar

    Jim, where are the functional parts of Fairfax County? I haven’t seen any in quite some time.

    A school board member has told me that FCPS has essentially abandoned most school events that require trips between the northern and the southern sections of the county because it’s just too hard to get from there to here or vice versa.

    Tysons Corner traffic is often at gridlock daily with development at 45 M square feet and with most FARs at less than 2.0. It can take more than one half hour to drive across Tysons Corner during the evening rush. Yet, the crazies, greedies or both on the Tysons Corner Land Use Task Force are considering increasing FARs to well above 2.0, with many at 3.0 or even 5.0. http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpz/tysonscorner/advaltpres_12102007.pdf If traffic is gridlocked with today’s densities, only a Tysons Corner landowner, their lackies and the severely mentally challenged would think that more density makes sense. Forrest Gump would see through this farce in a minute! This is not functional government in action.

    Commuters are using school parking lots as cut-through roads to avoid traffic back-ups with today’s Tysons Corner densities. What will happen when we add thousands and thousands more autos to these same roads?

    This all looks to me like dysfunctionality in the first degree.

    What Stafford County is facing does not seem sensible, but when compared to Fairfax County, it’s not that bad. Fairfax County is moving beyond the pale.

    TMT

  11. Anonymous Avatar

    I think all the major players have weighed in now ๐Ÿ™‚

    Each of us sitting in our various locations can say the pros and cons of where we live

    It seems the people of Stafford are content with their current settlement scheme.

    Something tells me Western Fairfax circa 1960 was much like Stafford

    Even today the area between Reston and Tysons Corner is basically single family on largeish lots

    I thought I had a point to all this :-p Oh yeah the free market and choice and elections

    Is it best that Loudoun keeps switching from pro to anti growth? Is it best that Fairfax focused on commercial instead of housing to diversify the tax base (pushing development outward?) Is it best that Prince William thought they could slow build their way out of everything?

    Maybe yes/Maybe no but these are the people that were elected by the public. Elections at work

    The free market to me is seeing where people choose to live. (Going back to my earlier comment) it seems that tons of people are choosing to live in Stafford for a single family house and have absolutely no desire to live in a mixed use environment and knowing full well the commute length they will put up with.

    -NMM

  12. Jim Bacon Avatar

    NMM, there’s more to a “free market” in real estate and land development than letting people “live where they want to live.” Such freedom is illusory if people aren’t provided a range of living choices to select from.

    How do we know that Virginians are deprivied of choices? By the fact that (a) municipal government restricts certain choices through zoning, and (b) developers try to offer alternative settlement patterns, such as the Transit Oriented Development, and give up because of the expense of surmounting procedural and regulatory obstacles.

    There is no “free market” in land development in Virginia today. Consumer choice is restricted. The restrictions are driven by a very constrained view on the part of municipal administrators and supervisors on how to hold down spending on infrastructure and public services.

  13. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    really quite an excellent dialog…

    but this:

    ..”Tysons Corner traffic is often at gridlock daily ….. are considering increasing FARs to well above 2.0, with many at 3.0 or even 5.0.”

    I don’t even to take TMT’s word that it is bad. I’ve been there.. and yes.. it’s bad…

    but why would any developer and any business considering locating there not be put off by the prospects of more/worse gridlock?

    It would seem that developers could have all the FAR wet dreams that they wish to have.. but when the time comes to plunk their money down.. and consider how long it will take to rent/lease what they build and get their money back – with interest…

    well.. why would they still be so gung ho on investing in more office space… if the place is already gridlocked?

    I mean.. no one would locate there.. if their employees and customers could not access them because of the gridlock..

    right?

    so they say money “talks” and in this case.. the “money” says that more density WILL yield more profits… no?

  14. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: what kind of NoVa employee would see a mixed-use home in Stafford?

    related to…. would the same mixed-use house in Stafford cost what it would cost in NoVa?

    I’d posit that the second question answer is no.. the mixed-use house in Stafford would be cheaper…

    So.. if a mixed use in Stafford is cheaper than a NoVa, mixed-use, the next question is – is a mixed-use townhouse (?) in Stafford cheaper than a SFH in Stafford.

    or is it?

    What if a SFH .. across the Rappahannock in Spotsylvania is cheaper than BOTH the Stafford mixed use townhouse AND the Stafford SFH.

    There’s a much easier, shorter, less blathering way to say the above…

    Drive til you qualify….(for a SFH).

    a phrase heard often from residents of mixed-use town-houses – “we’re only here until….we can qualify for a SFH”

    a phrase NOT often heard in mixed-use townhouse developments.. “I just love living in town”.

  15. Anonymous Avatar

    Larry, I would hope that some landowners in Tysons would realize the insanity of making Tysons ever bigger without more public facilities. Some, of course, do. But the desire to obtain financial windfalls is overcoming the thought process.

    Even in the midst of a mess like Tysons Corner, a parcel of land with a FAR of 3.5 or 5.0 is probably worth more than the same parcel of land with a FAR of 1.5.

    So what does the landowner do? Work to ensure that what is recommended for Tysons makes sense at the risk that his/her FAR stays at 1.5? Or do whatever it takes to get the 3.5 or 5.0 FAR?

    “All property rights are equal, but some property rights are more equal than others.”

    I also agree with Larry that “drive til your qualify” is still an important factor. Most people want an SFH, be they black, brown or white; whether they were born here or in some other country.

    What would probably help Stafford (or even South Dakota) is a decree from the DoD or DHS that it was concerned about too many essential contractors being located in the D.C. Metro, where a terrorist attack could shut down access to important goods and services.

    If you want company towns, you need companies. What would have happened to Stafford if BRAC would have moved the jobs, not to Ft. B and Springfield, but to Stafford or —– fill in the blank? That would create balanced communities.

    TMT

  16. Anonymous Avatar

    “They NEED the growth to generate enough funding to pay for the infrastructure for the houses built previously.”

    So, you finally agree with me. it is the ones built previously that never paid their way. Now they want to sock it to the newcomers.

    RH

  17. Anonymous Avatar

    “the “money” says that more density WILL yield more profits… no?”

    Yes, and more density would also yield more profits here onthe farm, along with nearly everyplace else.

    But it is just as Jim Bacon says, there is no free market in land development. Where else in Fairfax would you be allowed to create a New Tyson’s Place?

    Hint, look how long it took to get the tri-county connector. The anti growth crwod has effectivel shut down everything that isn’t already a disaster.

    RH

  18. Anonymous Avatar

    We are coming down to semantics

    It isn’t a totally free market but

    I would argue the people that make the zoning decisions and general growth strategies are elected officials or at least the elected officials appoint the people who make the decisions

    In that sense citizens have a say in what they want their communities to look like

    And ultimately noone is forcing anyone to live or work anywhere

    If you can’t find or don’t like something there is always an option to move. Or blog :-p, organize, lobby, or perhaps even directly engage in the political process to change what is occuring.

    NMM

  19. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “What would have happened to Stafford if BRAC would have moved the jobs, not to Ft. B and Springfield, but to Stafford or —– fill in the blank? That would create balanced communities.”

    First of all.. recognize that many, many folks that live in the Fredericksburg Area ARE Federal employees and/or contractors to same.

    and then let me illustrate my next point this way:

    http://tinurl.us/610e4b

    http://tinurl.us/5ee07a

    The Feds are fully aware that major certified homeland-security certified infrastructure is available in the Fredericksburg Area at A.P. Hill and Dahlgren, Va and to date.. have chosen to relocate to NoVa facilities…

    What you can say.. is that the Feds are acting the same way that private industry is – BOTH of them prefer… gridlocked NoVa to Fredericksburg.

    What more can I say?

  20. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    here’s the good link.. I hope:

    TinyURL.com/2nb8an

    basically it’s a map showing the proximity of Fredericksburg to Quantico, A.P. Hill and Dahlgren.

  21. Anonymous Avatar

    I think the problem is that no one knows what is dysfunctional and what works. On top of that we don’t know if what works is affordable.

    But everyone knows what they like and don’t like.

    The following is from a paper on open space policies and growth control issues.

    “And finally, the analysis suggests that while a growth ring strategy is most effective in reducing total developed acreage in the metropolitan area, this reduction in developed acreage is associated with a large net welfare loss. “

    Now, we have a lot of people telling us about the clear edge and controlling our cities with greenbelts, but none of them are telling it that it comes at a large social cost.

    It turns out that undevelopable open space can increase the value of neighboring propoerties as much as three times more as open space that is potentially developable. Therefore, it behooves us to get as many homes as possible near open space, so that we can increase the property values.

    Inevitably, this changes the transportation signature. So we need to make trade offs between open space and transportation costs, and property values, and co-location of businesses.

    People want to be near town to reduce their transportation costs, but they want to be away from town to avoid the pollution and “other problems”, and get the maximum value for their home.

    The only way to fix this, and also maximise everyone’s utility and property values is to see to it that both whatever is “in town” is properly dispersed and that what ever amenities open space provides is also properly dispersed. And, youhave to do BOTH of those things consistent with minimizing transportation.

    Another paper puts it this way:

    “(1) residents prefer to live close to open space and (2) open space amenities attract migrants to the city. Our main findings are that open space designation can produce leapfrog development; the effect of open space on the total area of developed land in the city is ambiguous; more dispersed forms of open space may be preferred when congestion externalities are present; depending on location, the provision of new open space may benefit some income groups more than others and may increase the income diversity of a city. “

    emphasis mine.

    RH

  22. Anonymous Avatar

    “And ultimately no one is forcing anyone to live or work anywhere”

    Not yet, anyway, but if the central planners get their way it may not be too long.

  23. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    RH.. I appreciate the excerpts.

    I’d also appreciate the link to the entire version..

    or else I end up wondering what the heck… “…this reduction in developed acreage is associated with a large net welfare loss” means.

    I think your statement that we don’t know what dysfunctional is… is interesting.

    If opinions are different as to what it is or is not.. then how would be know what parts to think about changing.

    Open Space ANYWHERE is not the same as Open Space in an urban area..

    .. and you need to define what open space is.

    Is it a Park?

    is it undeveloped land surrounded by an urban landscape and it’s not a park?

    is undeveloped land on the fringe “open space”?

    What differentiates “open space” from undeveloped land?

  24. Anonymous Avatar

    All good questions. When we can agree on answers, and that agreement eventually soaks into the political psyche, then we can make policies people can agree on, insteadof making policies for the purpose of ramming them down someone’s (preferably our enemies)throat.

    So, if providing open space raises property values in the area, who should pay for open space?

    I’ll see if I can retrieve the cites.

    RH

  25. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “So, if providing open space raises property values in the area, who should pay for open space?”

    oh.. you mean like deciding if Central Park in NYC is more valuable as a property-boosting amenity or to sell it for more skyscrapers?

    closer to home – Prince William Park for New Urban homes so people won’t have to drive down I-95 to Stafford?

    Let’s tell Belvoir and Quantico that they can’t hire any more people unless they actually house them on their property.

    or we could chop up PEC-land so that Tysons Corner can be “saved” – no?

    let’s think big here.. ๐Ÿ™‚

  26. Anonymous Avatar

    It is pretty clear that New Yorkers pay for central park, and like it that way.

    Elsewhere, it isn’t so clear who is paying for things, and who gets the benefits.

    RH

  27. Anonymous Avatar

    “Let’s tell Belvoir and Quantico that they can’t hire any more people unless they actually house them on their property.”

    And Arlington, Fairfax, and DC, too.

    RH

  28. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    how come it’s clear in NYC what citizens want and not here?

    I think it IS clear here.. but you just don’t agree.

    If you lived in NYC you’d probably be claiming that Central Park was wasteful open space.. that only benefited a few.. right?

    ๐Ÿ™‚

  29. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “”They NEED the growth to generate enough funding to pay for the infrastructure for the houses built previously.”

    So, you finally agree with me. it is the ones built previously that never paid their way. Now they want to sock it to the newcomers.”

    so.. here you go guy:

    “Sewer rates for Orange town residents will be going up as expected in January, but they could be on the hook for even higher costs if the home-building market doesn’t rebound.

    Without developers paying to hook into the town’s water and sewer systems, the town’s present customers will be picking up the tab for a new sewer plant.”

    http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2007/122007/12192007/342233

    so the RH answer is:

    “keep doing in the way we have been doing it because it’s not fair to give the existing users a free road and charge the new ones from now on”

    right?

    so what happens?

    “When Springsted analyzed the financing of a new plant two years ago, the town planner estimated that 80 new homes would be built in the town each year and that the tap fees for this new construction would pay the debt service on the loan.

    “Now the situation is different,” Town Manager Cole Hendrix said in a telephone interview yesterday. “We don’t have any building going on and if that doesn’t change, the town’s rate-payers will have to pick up that debt service.”

    now.. these same folks are going to think about proposed new growth this way:

    1. – HELL NO
    2. – oh sure.. go ahead and do it to us again

    correct answer?

    your turn….

    perhaps those environmental economists know how to fix this..

    ๐Ÿ™‚

  30. Anonymous Avatar

    how come it’s clear in NYC what citizens want and not here?

    Because in NYC they Pay for their parks. Here we just expropriate them, and instead of calling them scenic parks we call it “open space”, and we have the owners upport it.

    RH

  31. Anonymous Avatar

    Sounds like the Orange sewage operator was working a Ponzi scheme, and it collapsed when he couldn’t get any more buyers.

    Once those owners get hit with the new bills, they should be encouraging growth to spread the load, no?

    RH

  32. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    well.. it’s not the plant or “operator” – they merely do what the elected BOS directs them to do – in theory.

    and voters know that

    There is already strong anti-growth sentiment in Orange and this news will do the opposite of what you suggest… Orange could end up like Facquier if the no-growth folks are empowered by incidents like this that will bring in even more people to their ranks.

    so.. if you want to stir up really strong anti-growth sentiment just charge them more and more for the cost of growth…

    hey.. isn’t that the strategy of the Virginia Homebuilders?

    cool strategy…

    to think.. that all these homebuilders actually fork over money to pay folks to develop that strategy…

    It’s sorta like having them on the anti-growth payroll for free…

    no?

    ๐Ÿ™‚

  33. Anonymous Avatar

    There appears to be strong anti-growth sentiment everywhere.

    There is still going to be growth.

    Somewhere.

  34. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    oh .. there’s going to be growth.. it’s just going to cost an arm and a leg to pay for the infrastructure deficit…

    HOT lanes and the new 3202 impact fees and Access management and other things ongoing may actually work in FAVOR of growth once folks see changes to deal with the infrastructure issue.

    People are not opposed to growth.

    They opposed to the adverse impacts of growth.

    Growth does not inevitably cause adverse impacts.

    Some folks just don’t like change but most folks accept change but what they won’t accept is being dissed and ignored by developers and their elected.

Leave a Reply