The Botetourt Data Center, The Planning Commission, and Broken Promises

Contrary to Botetourt’s “News Flash” of July 3, planning commissions are required by Va. Code § 15.2-2223 to publish a “comprehensive plan” which may, among other things, “provide for the continued availability, quality, and sustainability of groundwater and surface water.” Consequently, it’s no surprise that Botetourt’s Comprehensive Plan of 2010–in effect while the Board of Supervisors conducted their secret negotiations with Google–had a lot to say about water:

The Code further holds, in § 15.2-2232, that a comprehensive plan “shall control the general or approximate location, character and extent of each feature shown on the plan. Thereafter, unless a feature is already shown on the adopted master plan…no…public building or public structure, public utility facility or public service corporation facility …whether publicly or privately owned, shall be constructed, established or authorized, unless…approved by the commission as being substantially in accord with the adopted comprehensive plan or part thereof. In connection with any such determination, the commission may, and at the direction of the governing body shall, hold a public hearing, after notice as required by § 15.2-2204.”

So they got that one wrong too.

A review of the 2010 Comprehensive plan is instructive in just how scandalously Botetetourt has otherwise departed from its own professed standards. On the first page we read that, to “be effective and useful, the plan must reflect the knowledge, values and aspirations of a community’s citizens and be embraced and implemented by elected and appointed representatives.” On page 2 we find a commitment “to promote balanced growth and development while protecting the County’s natural environment and cultural resources.”

Such promises are significant, the plan notes on page 6, because they “will assist in guiding property owners in decisions about their property.” Departing from the plan is, for this reason, a species of fraud.

“Community involvement,” we are told on page 1, “is one of the guiding principles that governed the preparation of this plan.” Again, on page 7, we find that public participation “is possibly the most important part of any planning process and this may be especially true for a countywide comprehensive plan. Botetourt County undertook this plan update with a solid commitment to public participation.”

What were the people of Botetourt telling the Planning Commission back in 2010? Read the summaries below and reflect on just how prescient they were.

Page 9: “Citizen Survey participants identified ‘managing growth and development,’ ‘economic development,’ and ‘protection of farm and rural land’ as the top three issues that the County will face in the next 20 years. Strong concerns about these three issues also emerged from the community-input meetings, along with more specific concerns about the pace and pattern of development, community design, preservation of natural and cultural resources, retaining traditional industries such as agriculture as a cornerstone for economic development, in addition to controlling commercial development along U.S. Route 220 and around exit 150.”

“[S]urveyed residents perceive population growth as ‘somewhat too fast’ or ‘much too fast.’ Growth management received the highest average score (8.35 out of 10) relative to areas of importance to residents.”

“At the public forums, participants expressed their perception…that the County’s future is somewhat threatened by factors beyond the control of local residents and local government.”

“Citizens expressed concern that the attractive character of Botetourt County creates growth pressures that will overwhelm it and compromise the rural quality of life for those who currently live here…Overall most comments focused on how to maintain the rural character and related land uses.”

Page 10: “[R]esidents expressed concerns about the the level of commercial development occurring on U.S. Route 220 and at key intersections…Residents are concerned that that too much commercial development…would create congestion, compete with commercial activities in the incorporated towns and fundamentally alter the character of th rural ‘view from the road’ valued by residents and a factor in attracting potential tourists to the area. Stakeholders interviewed…focused on the need to control commercial development along U.S. Route 220 and focus growth around existing incorporated towns.”

Page 32: “Concerns about the potential conversion of farmland to other uses were raised at public workshop on the plan…The number of farms in Botetourt County has been declining over the years (13.8 percent between 1982 and 1997), but this has recently rebounded to 638 in 2007. While the number of farms has increased, the total acreage devoted to farming has declined, with a decrease of average farm size from 167 acres to 138 acres…the average value of farms has increased 75 percent from 1997 to 2007.”

In accordance with these expressed concerns, the Planning Commission made a number of assurances:

Page 45: “The land use policies of this plan are based on two key strategies: directing growth to appropriate areas and reducing development pressures to convert farmland to higher intensity uses.”

Page 5: “The provisions for various zoning districts and zoning regulations included in the ordinance should be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan.”

Page 34: “[E]conomic development…must be compatible with the overarching land use policies to ensure that the County develops as envisioned.”

Page 49: “Strip Shopping Centers: Ensure that zoning and parking standards discourage strip commercial shopping centers and auto-oriented building designs.”

Page 50: “Preserving scenic view and vistas is particularly important for Botetourt County. The County’s scenery is critical to the rural character and is one of its most distinguishing features…

Keys to Preserving Scenic Views:

Maintain farmland and forestland
Develop corridor plans and overlay districts…
Site rural buildings to their context
Use viewshed easements around particularly important sites
Limit ridgeline development
Use open space development designs.”

Page 74: “Development proposals should respect the natural features of a site.”

Page 76: “Botetourt’s air quality situation increases the importance of considering air quality impacts when evaluating…economic development opportunities.”

Page 80: “Require the preparation of a groundwater impact analysis when…large-scale developments are proposed.”