By Sandhya Somashekhar
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Several Loudoun County officials are calling for a review of the way rezoning applications are processed, after an argument erupted last week over whether supervisors and Planning Commission members have enough time to study the requests before they come to a vote.
The application that prompted the controversy is a proposed mixed-use development called Ridgewater Park, a complex of offices, shops and about 2,000 residences proposed for a 736-acre parcel along the Dulles Greenway near Leesburg.
Lansdowne Development Group is seeking to rezone the area to allow construction of a development similar to the new Lansdowne Town Center, another of its projects.
The anchor of Ridgewater Park would be a 500,000-square-foot Inova Health Systems medical research center.
The project has been criticized by slow-growth advocates, who say its location on the banks of Goose Creek Reservoir could adversely affect drinking water. The reservoir supplies drinking water to Fairfax City and parts of Loudoun County.
In addition, opponents say the change in density would be too dramatic for an area where current zoning allows no more than one homes per 10 acres.
The developer, however, has made several concessions. The project would include 200 acres of parkland, and the developer says it has offered $40 million in road improvements.
On Jan. 22, the Planning Commission sent a Comprehensive Plan amendment -- which is needed for the rezoning to go forward -- to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation for approval.
At that meeting, Planning Commission member Nancy J. Doane said that the details of the rezoning application were changing so quickly she was concerned that neither the commission nor its staff could thoroughly study the plan.
Doane asked that the commission unofficially institute a seven-day cooling period, meaning that the panel would have at least seven days to study the application without any changes made by the developer. She said there was a "consensus" on the commission to adopt that approach.
But the rezoning application was placed on the agenda of the commission's work session last week, even though the developer had sent changes directly to commissioners' homes the previous week.
"To me, the commission meeting was in clear discord with the consensual guidance," Doane said.
Commission member J. Kevin Ruedisueli agreed.
"We had agreed to slow things down because of the complexity of the issues involved," he said. "I've felt the Planning Commission is trying to do too much too quickly, and this is a symptom of that."
But several commissioners said they think it was simply the natural pace of business in a county such as Loudoun.
"I don't think we are fast-tracking it," said commission member Barbara Munsey. "I think we are continuing to work at a rapid pace because we are lucky enough to have a hell of an economy here."
In a memo submitted Friday to Board of Supervisors Chairman Scott K. York (I), Planning Commission Chairman Robert J. Klancher and Vice Chairman Teresa White Whitmore explained that their pace was affected in part by the Board of Supervisors' schedule.
The supervisors scheduled a public hearing for today on the Comprehensive Plan amendment and will be in budget discussions much of the rest of the month. Under state law, they must decide on the amendment within 90 days of receiving it from the Planning Commission.
Klancher and Whitmore said they were told that their work session last week was necessary so supervisors would have more of the commission's input before today's public hearing.
Supervisor Lori L. Waters (R-Broad Run) said it was common for the Board of Supervisors to receive information about development applications at the last minute, sometimes as the board is seated at the dais for the meeting at which the application will be discussed.
"This has been a problem for years where new information is being put before us at the time of the vote," Waters said. "That makes it very difficult to judge where the changes are, or even ask intelligent questions during the discussion."
She said she expected supervisors to discuss that issue at a meeting this year.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.