CAAR Blog

By Dave Phillips

Probably the worst thing the baby-boomers endeared in society is NIMBYism. Since I am a boomer, I have the god-given right to criticize everyone because after all, it’s all about me. That’s right, boomers are a completely self-absorbed, selfish, and often blinded by the reality that exists just outside their personal auras. NIMBYism is a simple manifestation of the selfishness of boomers. Of course I, being a boomer, believe that I am immune to this me-centric thinking and if you don’t like that, get your own blog.

A great example of my point can easily be found in my neighborhood – Forest Lakes. During the Places29 debate, my neighbors became enraged that there was a road on the consultant’s map (one of many “theoretical� roads) that connected the back end of the neighborhood to Polo Grounds Road. Without any debate of the facts (remember, facts outside a boomer’s personal aura are irrelevant), a petition drive was conducted and hundreds of signatures were obtained. It is easy to get a boomer to sign a petition – just appeal to their selfishness like this…

“Hi, I’m one of your neighbors and we are getting signatures on this petition to keep our neighborhood safe for our children. The county wants to build a highway into the back of the neighborhood and we believe that the truck traffic alone will result in the death of several children – not to mention global warming. (Note: whenever you want to appeal to a boomer always mention children’s safety and global warming.) Would you like to sign the petition?�

“Ah, yeah sure. What is the county thinking? They probably just want to raise my taxes again.�

The facts in this case are interesting, but remember, boomers don’t see facts that aren’t important to them. Here are just a few facts as an example:

• The road has been on the books for many years. It was on the map before any of my neighbors moved in.
• The road is designed to connect to the SECOND PHASE of the Meadowcreek Parkway! Everyone able to read this article in 2007 will be dead before the 2^nd Phase is built. Hell, we might all be dead before the 1^st phase is built.
• Everyone who lived near this “theoretical roadâ€? was told about the road prior to buying their home. At least I was and I’ve lived in this section of the neighborhood longer than anyone.
• There is no money to build this road and it is so far down the priority list that the county planners had a hard time figuring out what road the residents were up in arms about.

The result of the petition drive was dramatic. Thanks to a very cooperative local Supervisor’s efforts, the road was down-graded to a hiking/biking trail. That trail, of course, will never be built. A road is still very possible if and when it makes sense. The route is still on the map and would only take a nano-second to get changed back to a road if it fits with the county policy of having connected neighborhoods so “real� roads don’t have to be built.

By Dave Phillips

I have made a quick study of the proffer policy currently being considered by Albemarle County and have some serious concerns.  I thought the point of developing the policy was that it would prevent each developer from having to negotiate a “voluntary� proffer with the county.  However, the current policy under consideration seems to just trade one negotiation for another.

I think marketplaces are better when they are predictable and standardized.  The hope was that a flat fee (proffer) would be established so buyers and developers would know what to expect, but that does not appear to be the case.  Instead, the county seems to be setting a minimum proffer and then the rest is negotiable.  This is no better than the current situation.  Some things will probably give developers credit and others cost extra.  The bottom line is, the proffer system will still be a contentious negotiation that will falsely stall the approval process and create ill will between the county and developers.

So who cares?  The developers can afford it, right?  If that is what you are thinking, you need to get a reality check.  The $17,900 currently being considered by the county as a MINIMUM proffer will be paid by the homebuyer.  Fortunately, the Supervisors will likely exempt lower priced homes, but the rest of us will be paying the cost.  This is not really an “increase� because proffers are already being paid by developers and the costs are being pushed to the buyers. 

My last and final concern of this proposed policy is that I think it will encourage development in the rural area and encourage by-right development.  Of course, I think the current policy encourages that and the numbers back me up (60% on building permits in the rural area).  I was really hoping that the new policy would standardize the proffer process and thus encourage developers to build in the growth area.

How is it fair that someone who buys a home in the rural area does not have to pay a proffer?  You might argue that it is fair because the growth area folks get sewer and water, but the proffer money does not go for that despite what you think.  Developers run the water and sewer infrastructure, not the county.  So what is this proffer policy all about?  Maybe it is just a way to raise more money and maybe it is just misguided policy making.  Frankly, I’m not sure.