I have never said (I hope) that the County’s regulations are 100% responsible for the push to the rural areas. The moving-target aspect of the regs does in fact discourage developers from building in the growth areas.

Look at the timeframes for the rezonings. The County needs to clearly detail what the developers need to do and then work with them. It should not be (idealist point of view coming) an us -v- them mentality.

1) part of me would like to shut down all growth, let us all catch our breath and then start back again.
2) I don’t necessarily disagree with the Biscuit Run denial, for all the reasons that have been identified elsewhere. I look forward to seeing what the BoS ultimately does.
3) the longer rezonings take, the higher costs will be.
4) This is one perspective – Locked Out report (PDF)
5) When given an option to go by-right, as Biscuit Run might versus rezoning to allow far more houses, but through which the County may extract proffers, which would you prefer? (I honestly don’t know what my answer is, but part of me leans towards “neither.”
6) Discussions such as this help (hopefully) to clarify things on all sides, for that I thank you.

Even more information at CvilleTomorrow

I don’t understand how you can ignore the fact that over 10,000 dwelling units have been approved in the city and growth areas since 2000 (over 8,000 in the County growth areas). How many more growth area DUs are you suggesting would begin to diminish the number of rural area houses being built. This myth perpetuated by the development community, and apparently the real estate community, that the County’s red tape is at fault for driving houses into the rural area is simply not supported by the available statistics.

The County has approved nearly every major rezoning in the past five years, and speaking as a city resident, painting it as the culprit verges on misinformation and a disservice to your readers.

For 2006, 315 units went into the Development area and 260 into the Rural area.

Granted, this is only referencing single-family units, but it’s a good guide to show that a substantial amount of building is being done in the rural area.

When you factor in “Shared Walls” (condo’s, Townhouses, and the like” how does that data change?

Thanks for the comment. How do what you say and what what this data say jive?

For the SFD permits detailed above (last 12 months), 64% were in rural areas and 18% were in the Crozet designated growth area (i.e. not all the White Hall housing shown above is in Crozet).

Granted, this is only referencing single-family units, but it’s a good guide to show that a substantial amount of building is being done in the rural area. When it takes developers 5+ years to get approvals because of vague and ever-shifting requirements laid out by the County, of course they are going to move to where it is easier to build.

Sure knock yourself out!

What is lacking is regional cooperation and integration.

If we try to plug the hole in one area of the county it will just occur in another. If we plug it completely in Albemarle is will relieve itself in the surrounding counties. I say control the leak and concentrate it in the areas that are already urban and suburban.

I like that. Mind if I use it sometime?

What’s more, our job market continues to expand at a rate faster than any other in the state. According to Virginia’s Economic Indicators our metro area (Charlottesville, Albemarle, Nelson, Fluvanna, and Greene) now has over 100,000 jobs for the first time ever. We have a growing economy and wherever that occurs you are going to see population growth. The issue, as you’ve said, is where and how we grow.

I personally would like to see the process for developing in the growth areas streamlined. Developers need to know what they need to do to get approved there and the County should provide them with the information up front. If this process is made easier I doubt we would see as many developers flocking to the rural areas where the process is less strenuous. We need to make sure we are providing adequate housing close to town so prices and a lack of options don’t push people into the rural counties. In my opinion we need to encourage growth in the urban ring and along 29 North to Ruckersville. These areas are already developed and I think we would all rather see development concentrated there rather than our rural areas. Someone somewhere has to make sacrifices. As you said growth is going to occur no matter what and advocating no growth at all only makes you look out of touch and unrealistic.

I think the best illustrative metaphor of what I am talking about would be that scene in Vegas Vacation when Chevy Chase decided to plug the pressure leak in the Hoover Dam. He would plug one hole and then water would come out of another. He kept this process going and going with the same result. In terms of growth the pressure to grow has to be relieved somewhere. If we try to plug the hole in one area of the county it will just occur in another. If we plug it completely in Albemarle is will relieve itself in the surrounding counties. I say control the leak and concentrate it in the areas that are already urban and suburban.

And if so- what happens to those farmers who’ve sold their Development Rights so they can get the lower tax rate? Do their taxes continue to get jacked up year after year to cover those infrastructure losses? Until at some point they’re back where they started? As it is right now it seems like it’s the rural areas covering the costs of the urban areas.