So the truth is out. Confirmed, via the most recent article in the in an interview with The Washington Post that he plans to introduce a policy next year on the concept of “clustering,”a new approach to managing the county’s rural area.
Allow me to interject some facts here. There IS a “cluster ordinance” in the comprehensive plan for allowing clustering of homes on large tracts of land. I will put a copy of the ordinance up on the rural crescent website and link to it so people can become better informed. I am hopeful that maybe even Corey and Peter Candland will visit the link in order to educate themselves on the current cluster ordinance.
Lo and behold, Peter Candland is already finding ways to do Corey’s bidding! I don’t think that Peter has a full understanding of land use or else he would understand why Corey’s proposal is bunk.
“That, I believe, succeeds at nothing,” Stewart said. “I think that we need to look at better ways of preserving very large areas of rural ground as well as promoting more commercial office space and high-end retail. We have to take the emotion out of this debate and give it a cold, hard, objective look.”
Stewart said his argument is that having a hodgepodge of 10-acre lots doesn’t make sense. Better, he said, to have a development on 100 acres, where 30 acres are developed and the other 70 are open space, he said. Stewart said that such a policy would take a long time to develop, and the board would do so “in conjunction with the community.”
Candland said he rejects the commonly used term “slow growth,” saying “managed growth” more adequately describes his philosophy to encourage growth along with adequate infrastructure. But he largely agrees with Stewart’s philosophy of bringing the county more high-end retail and office space, he said, adding that improving the county’s quality of life will drive economic growth.
“Plain and simple,” Candland said, “we need to bring business to Prince William County.”
The level of ignorance astounds me. I wonder if Corey and Peter are aware that there is plenty of undeveloped land in the “Development Area” that has YET to be rezoned for its allowed long range use. There is not a lack of opportunity for high end retail and commercial (anyone heard of Innnovation?) in Prince William County. There is a lack of those high end retailers and Corporations CHOOSING to do business here.
Busting open the Rural Crescent will only have one sure fire result, higher taxes for everyone. Gotta love those conservative values.
I wonder if Michael Neibauer from the Washington Business Journal will have a follow up article to citizens of Prince William County affirming his pre and post prediction on Canlands election being the “game change” for development in the western end.
Not that there’s some massive push to build new homes in Prince William County, especially the western end. But when a proposal does come along — and it will — Candland’s victory may give the developer a narrow opening.
I heard the Gainesville Druids meet over on Boundary Lane in NO-man’s land. They are often skyclad. Lots of peyote and sloe gin.
@Moon-howler – I expressed my concerns regarding the LDS church because of comments #44 & #29 – and I still stand by my view that we should judge our elected officials by what they do, not on how they are quoted in the paper.
Elena,
I appreciate your thoughts and I am sure you are right about what goes on at many churches. But the LDS just doesn’t work that way. It has very strict rules prohibiting use of its facilities and resources to promote political parties and candidates. If anyone, member or not, attempted to canvas a church or church-sponsored event for votes, the local ecclesiastical authorities would put a stop to it in short order.
I would agree that your blog and those who follow it have been very fair to the church – which is why some of the comments I have seen on this thread have surprised me.
Boundary Ln. is no longer a boundary for the Gainesville/Brenstville Districts. Flat Branch and Lomond Dr are the new boundaries. Boundary Ln is now well into the Coles District.
I wonder if the GDS will meet at the base of the new cell tower. I don’t think the new supervisors to our area are ready for the GDS. 🙂
Boundary Lane is hot. I don’t care what it boundaries. I bet no one would believe it existed in PWC. I know I sure didn’t and that was almost my old stomping grounds. I expect the young male howler knew though.
I wish that new cell tower would finish up. Things are rough around here around rush hour.
Well then Observer, thank you for your clarification on the strict standards of LDS. I imagine though that the congregants knew Peter Candland was running and I presume they would offer their support.
Having said that, in the end, the issue is about land use, not churches. When people see the trees coming down in droves being filled over with asphault, while the roads and schools become more congested, and taxes increase, I don’t want to hear one person who either voted for Candland and Stewart or did not vote at all complain.
@Observer
Most churches cannot endorse a candidate legally. There are ways around it. You know people who go to your church and its easy to stop and speak to them and tell them you appreciate their support. If ones social network also has firm foundation in church, it is all the more likely to happen.
It has been going on since before we were a nation. I put it in the category of JUST IS.
I don’t know what the big deal is. How does the scenery change if we substitute methodist, catholic, or baptist instead of Mormon. I don’t think anything changes.
I am not going to censor people for mentioning someone’s religion unless the remarks are hateful. I don’t think anything hateful was said here.
OK, the numbers don’t support any assertions of a mandate, in fact they seem to indicated abject apathy when compared to past years.
In 2003, 8048 out of 28175 registered Gainesville voters went to the polls, 28.5% turnout
In 2007, 9876 out of 33746 registered Gainesville voters went to the polls, 29.2% turnout
In 2011, 9071 out of 35765 registered Gainesville voters went to the polls, 25.3% turnout
In essence despite a 6% growth in registered voters, 805 fewer voters turned up at the polls. If my math is correct, if the average percentage (28.85%) of voters for the prior two magisterial elections had shown up, there should have been roughtly 10318 votes cast in Gainesville. They missed the mark by 1247 voters (12.1%).