The 2026 Botetourt Comprehensive Plan: Bend Over
Next up is the 2026 Botetourt Comprehensive Plan, but I think we’d better recap this series first.
We’ve seen how a favorite corporate practice is to find something public, inexpensive or free, take possession of it, poison it, and then sell it back to the public. Google does it with mosquitoes. The Water Authority does it with water.
This scheme was facilitated by a major overhaul of the Virginia Code in 1950 (and by simultaneous changes in the laws of other states). The specter of communism was used to justify the creation of “stay behind” armies in Europe, and, at home, the importation of quantities of Nazi scientists, and the reengineering of our laws along fascist lines. Of course, after the war, “fascism” was quite the dirty word, so we speak instead of “public-private partnerships.” The Virginia Code is chock full of these things. Just look at Title 15.2.
I describe the operation of public-private partnerships as “vampire pimping.” A local private corporation (the pimp) is given some kind of public property (land, water, etc.), which it then advertises to larger, frequently foreign corporations (vampires). In this way a formerly public resource is efficiently exploited, with minimal benefit to the original possessors. The pattern is so close to prostitution that I wonder nobody notices.
We frequently find economic prostitution rings: in the case of the data center, the Botetourt Board of Supervisors, the Botetourt Economic Development Authority, the Roanoke Regional Partnership, Appalachian Power, and the Western Virginia Water Authority (each one a Title 15.2 creation) were all involved. Pinch yourself and remember that this is all authorized by the Virginia Code.
This will all be relevant to our examination of the 2026 Comprehensive Plan. Botetourt and its buddies plan on more pimping.
This document contains a large amount of embarrassing bloviation: it’s entitled “Envision 2045,” for instance, and weaves an “intricate tapestry of community needs [and] aspirations.” But, upon reflection, this may be the most creditable thing about it.
On page 3, the plan sells us “collective well-being and sustainable growth” by “seamlessly” aligning “economic vitality” and “environmental stewardship.” On page 4 it purports to reflect “your voices, your priorities, and your hopes for a strong and vibrant future.” The Comprehensive Plan, we are to believe, “is a promise to our residents” to “preserve the landscapes and community character that define us” and to honor “our rural character.”
We had this kind of stuff in the 2010 Comprehensive Plan too. All of it was ignored, but at least they gave us the courtesy of pretending. This time around, they are much less embarrassed about their true plans.
In the first 16 pages, Botetourt mentions the preferences of its residents, as if in acknowledgement that they will object to everything that follows. In surveys conducted in 2018 and 2019, residents repeated the sentiments recorded in the 2010 document: they hate development, want Botetourt to remain rural, and believe the Board of Supervisors is wrecking the county. What follows in the plan will not change their minds.
Page 40: “Since 2001, some of the most changing land cover categories include High-Intensity Development, Medium-Intensity Development…the percent of their total changed greatly (38.4% for High-Intensity Development, for example)…As land cover changes to developed land, it is impossible to return that land to its original state.”
Page 53: “Many…large employers are sited within industrial or business parks. Space is limited in these parks, and additional sites will need to be identified in the future to allow for more industrial growth.”
On page 54, they explain the necessity of pimping:
“A highly educated workforce is necessary to attract skilled manufacturing and high-tech companies to the County.”
And note that their procurer friends have a role to play:
“Botetourt County should work with economic development partners to broaden job opportunities for…highly educated professionals” “
Threatening that development will spread:
“Development to date has focused mainly on the southern portions of the county”
More pimping on page 55:
“Economic development efforts in Botetourt are focused on business expansion, attraction, and retention…[attraction] involves marketing the County’s assets.”
On page 57, we find a remarkable discounting of county preferences, and yet more organized prostitution:
“Over 60 percent of survey respondents indicated that commercial development efforts should focus on improving and updating existing commercial developments. Seemingly, residents would prefer redeveloping vacant commercial property rather than building new sites. While this is an understandable desire, it provides its own set of challenges…Needs Assessment: Identification and creation of new industrial and business development parks; Collaboration and communication across economic development agencies.”
Pages 58-59: “Strategies: Implement the findings and goals of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy…expand the County’s economic development efforts, including new and expanded resources for the Office of Economic Development…Identify potential new or expanded business and industrial park sites in the County…encourage rehabilitation of existing structures for commercial use, when possible…Be active partners in existing regional and county-specific economic planning and development.”
To repeat, all of these economic development offices, agencies, and authorities are Title 15.2 panderers.
On page 62, the plan reflects that, before the Supervisors got busy, Botetourt residents could reach their tranquil homes by means of uncongested highways: “Historically, residents of Botetourt could enjoy a short drive into the population center of Roanoke City but return to their quiet homes in the County.”
But all that is in the past. The roads are lousy, and Botetourt needs to forget quiet, privacy, solitude, and the American Dream, and embrace urbanization and affordable housing.
Page 65: “While [single unit detached housing] is predominant and seemingly the preference in the County, a lack of variety in housing type can limit the type of person who lives in Botetourt…The majority of housing units in Botetourt are owner-occupied at 86.3 percent…Home ownership has long been viewed as the cornerstone of the American dream, but as housing costs outpace wage growth across the nation, this dream becomes more difficult to attain.”
You see, after the “2008 financial crisis…more individuals and families turned to renting rather than owning, and the ‘traditional’ single-family style of housing development began to shift…demand for more diverse housing options is growing.”
Page 66: “Affordable housing, which can conjure images of cheaply built, unattractive housing, can actually be higher quality and attractive and is not synonymous with subsidized housing,” and yet we read later in the same paragraph, “partnering with community organizations, developers, and government agencies to seek funding for housing is an effective strategy.”
Page 72: In 2016 a “Countywide Market Analysis For-Sale and Rental Housing…identified several conclusions including:…The housing market is stronger for rental housing…The County has no affordable housing…A need for County Officials…to attract more homebuilders and to reduce development costs…A need for zoning that allows for townhomes…A likely continued demand for more industrial land.”
A “2019 Housing Study identified highly suitable vacant acreage for housing in all zoning districts…Agricultural zoned property has the most acreage deemed highly suitable for housing development…[the study] identified…key housing objectives…attract developers…Market Botetourt County as a livable community…Support the creation of more housing options.”
Page 74: “Housing in Botetourt has traditionally followed a single-family, higher value home development pattern. While this has worked for many people in the County, needs are constantly evolving…With job growth in Botetourt and fewer housing development opportunities in Roanoke County and City, development pressure will continue to grow in the County. The following are needs in Botetourt…Analysis of current zoning for opportunities to encourage housing development…housing options that meet the pressures of economic growth…Partnerhips with housing focused government agencies, developers, and nonprofit organization.”
One particular policy on page 74 is even more stunning: “Discourage…single-family growth in areas best suited for higher density residential growth.”
Page 75: “Consider expansion of higher density zoning districts in appropriate locations..allowing accessory dwelling units by-right in all residential zones…reduction in minimum parking requirements…develop more affordable housing, including density bonuses and waived or reduced development fees.”
I know all of this is unpalatable, but don’t worry, Botetourt has planned a propaganda barrage:
“Host community outreach [concerning] Virginia Housing, the Department of Housing and Community Development, SERCAP [etc.]…continue to market the county’s assets…Foster community trust through consistent outreach regarding…development..Work with large employers and regional bodies.”
The 2010 Comprehensive Plan guaranteed no more “commercial strip development.” They’re done pretending on that point.
Page 79: “Commercial strip development is prevalent and is likely to remain the primary commercial development type in Botetourt…Recently, denser housing has started to develop…for multifamily residential living…Industrial and business parks are an important…development type in Botetourt…Current commerce parks are nearing capacity…so other sites must be explored.”
Page 76: “Botetourt will merge the two existing UDAs, Daleville Town Center area and the Gateway Crossing area to provide a singular, seamless UDA that acknowledges the growth along the 220 corridor.”
Page 95: “Future development in [non-industrial areas east of I-81] may include a combination of service related commercial uses including hospitality, lodging, retail, and office uses…Buildings may be larger in scale than neighborhood commercial sites, and often include stand-alone structures, multi-tenant strip centers, and highway-oriented mixed-use nodes.”
There you have it. This is a representative sample of what you can expect from the county over the next nineteen years. I want to write more about how this links up with a Regional strategy that appears to be underway, but for now, I’m just overwhelmed by the audacity of all this–what is nothing less than an act of defiance against the people of the county. This document could form the basis of a criminal charge for incitement to riot.
Also in this series:
The Botetourt Data Center, The Planning Commission, and Broken Promises
The Botetourt Data Center: Vampire Pimps
The Botetourt Data Center: The Legacy of Fascism
The Botetourt Data Center & the Lie of Freedom
If It’s Not Love, Then It’s the Data Center That Will Bring Us Together
The Botetourt Data Center: A Bad Deal with a Scammy Cherry on Top
The Botetourt Data Center, The Water Authority, and an Invitation to Corruption
The Botetourt Data Center: Bilious Corporate Prerogative
The Botetourt Data Center: Don’t Fear the Hamster Kaiju
Follow these groups for more information: