By Charles Leffler
Midlothian Exchange.com
Featured in July 19, 2007 print edition 

The Chesterfield County Planning Commission held two public meetings to gauge public reaction to the latest version of the proposed Upper Swift Creek Plan on Thursday, July 12. The commission’s proposal is due before the Board of Supervisors next meeting at the end of July. Nearly 100 people turned out for the evening meeting at Mt. Hermon Baptist Church on Genito Road.

While citizen comments reiterated concern over roads, schools and infrastructure, the most heated debate arose over the newly proposed deferred growth area, which would be located north of Genito Road and west of Mt. Hermon Road. 

According to the revised proposal, development in the deferred growth area would be limited to primarily agricultural and forestall uses. Single family residences would be allowed along existing roadways, but only to be built on large parcels of land. All other types of development, public water and wastewater would not be extended into the area, until the plan is amended in the future. 

Chris Sallé was one of the first to speak at the evening meeting. “I’ve got 400 acres involved in this deferred plan,” said Sallé concerned that the ban on development would devalue his property. “For the life of me, I can’t really figure out how this is going to go forward.” 

“Would anybody on your side of the table there or anybody out in the audience do anything to diminish the value of property? 
I feel this plan will do just that to those of us who own property in the deferred growth area. I don’t see any way around it,” he said. 

The property that Sallé owns within the deferred growth area has been in his family for centuries dating back to the original Huguenot settlers. “I’ve lived there all my life,” he continued. 

Sallé said he has no plans to develop the property. However, if circumstances forced him to sell or develop his property, Sallé wants to have the right to do so. “I just don’t want my rights taken away from me.

“The point is property rights and the rights of the property owner,” Sallé said. “I hate to point fingers, but I see so many people and many of them are not even from around here. 

“Yet their input can determine what happens to us here for the next 10 years, so it really concerns me.”

Shelly Schuetz, who has lived in the county for 33 years, said she backed the proposed plan’s deferred growth area because something needs to be done to curtail a situation that has gotten out of hand. “I feel like it’s not the responsibility of the Planning Commission or the Board of Supervisors to insure that the landowners have a return on investment,” she said. 

“On the other hand, I feel like if we don’t address the issues of the Upper Swift Creek Plan; services, environment, all of those things that upset life of people who live in the area, then that devalues their land and their ability to sell and develop.” 

Schuetz said that the problem is that the infrastructure has fallen so far behind growth that something has to be done to allow it to catch up. “The only way to do some type of catch-up series is to slow growth or have deferred areas. 

“We have to work together for those who are developing land, for those who are here and for those who live here,” she said. “We talk about property rights and I feel like we’re only talking about the property rights of those large landowners. But the people who live here, who own postage stamps [lots] have rights too.”

Paul Strehler also agreed with the proposed plan. Strehler has lived on 16.5 acres on the far western edge of the deferred growth area for 15 years. “I think the plan is a good idea,” he said. 

Strehler said he is concerned that further development will bring about the extinction of the last true rural area of the county. “Obviously out here we would like to have everything stay real rural and pastoral forever,” he said. “But I don’t think any of us really have any allusions that it’s not going to really develop. I think the plan addresses the need for an orderly sort of situation.”

“The developers don’t know anything, it seems to me, other than putting as many houses on acreage as they can,” Strehler said. “It’s not in their interest to put a house on four acres, a house on five acres, and I can understand that. That’s really what ought to happen, at least in some places. It doesn’t have to be wall to wall houses in subdivisions everywhere in the entire county.” 

The Chesterfield County Planning Commission will hold another meeting in the county’s public meeting room on July 19th to hear public comment. Following citizen input, the commission will vote whether it will or will not recommend the proposed plan to the Board of Supervisors.  

The plan will then go forward to the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors at their July 26th meeting.

All Real Estate Articles

Instantly read the rest of this important information! Just fill out the form below and click the SUBMIT button at the bottom of the form. You'll automatically become a VIP Buyer and receive this report and unlimted access to over 75 real estate reports!   Your Contact Information  (Please complete all fields)   First Name: Last Name: Daytime Phone: Evening Phone:       E-mail: Home Plans Buying Selling None City: State/Province:         Copy The Word In The Image.

[ ..More About Richmond Swift Creek Growth Plans ]