Pr. William Wants to Build 25 Centers Around Transit

Stewart Schwartz, executive director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, said Prince William's plan raises issues because it appears the county is adding development, not shifting it. (By Linda Spillers -- Associated Press)

Planning commissioners did not vote on the proposal last night, but they are expected to do so in coming weeks. The overhaul of the land-use chapter of the county's Comprehensive Plan is tentatively scheduled to go before the Board of County Supervisors in December.

Approval of the plan will not give developers the right to build, said Ray Utz, the county's chief of long-range planning. Supervisors will need to make subsequent decisions to allow that growth to occur.

"We don't have a blank slate here in Prince William County," Utz said. "We want to respect what we have while we talk about change. Our current regulations often preclude the type of quality development we want as a community. This allows an opportunity for us to let our bad regulations get out of the way of good ideas."

Several elected officials, including Supervisor John T. Stirrup Jr. (R-Gainesville), have raised questions about a potential conflict of interest of advisory committee members. Some members are developers who did not officially disclose that they have a financial interest in the location of some of the centers.

Bob Pugh, an investment manager and former financial analyst for the county, said developers on the committee stand to personally benefit.

"This is nothing but a scheme to promote high-density development in the county," Pugh said.

Gail H. Johnson, chairman of the Prince William Architectural Review Board, said the plan does not ensure the protection of the county's historic land.

"We don't know if [the centers] are sitting on assets that the state has determined to be of historical value," she said. "Before developers dig, clear-cut or purchase that land, I want them to understand that that is historic land, and you have to take into consideration what that means."

The county has not done enough public outreach to sell people on the plan, Schwartz said, and officials should give it three more months of staff analysis before the Planning Commission votes on it.

"The public wants greater certainty about where development is going to go and how it's going to happen," Schwartz said. "They are working toward the right concept for planning for the future. But there are still issues that need to be resolved. In the current real estate slump, there is no rush to finish this."