More Rezoning Opposition at Supervisors Meeting
NO REZONING signs are popping up like mushrooms around Northampton County. (Wave photo)
By DORIE SOUTHERN
Cape Charles Wave
November 17, 2014
Northampton County residents again turned out for a Board of Supervisors meeting Wednesday, November 12, to raise concerns about proposed zoning ordinance changes that have been the center of controversy since they were presented to the public last spring. All but one of the dozen speakers requested the withdrawal of the rezoning proposals. Only local Realtor Bill Parr, who as chairman of the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee helped to influence the proposed changes, spoke in favor of going forward with the zoning code rewrite.
CONTINUED FROM FIRST PAGE
Virginia Eastern Shorekeeper Jay Ford noted that two Supervisors had attended the public forum held by Shorekeeper and Citizens for a Better Eastern Shore in Eastville November 6. Ford said that while he was pleased with the turnout and the insightful presentations, he could not shake a feeling of disappointment that civic organizations [instead of County officials] were left with the job of presenting information to the public about the consequences of the proposed changes.
Ford provided letters signed by 126 attendees of the forum asking that the Board of Supervisors withdraw the proposed zoning ordinance changes. Some of those who signed did express a need for zoning changes, he said, “but no one, not one, felt that the process [of developing the proposed changes] had been held properly.”
Ford asked the Supervisors to listen to citizen input, request environmental and economic impact studies, and make changes in accordance with the County Comprehensive Plan. He offered the service of Shorekeeper in helping to advertize and organize meetings with the public so that a consensus could be reached.
Former Planning Commissioner Roberta Kellam questioned whether the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors were on the same page regarding maintaining Bay Act protections on the seaside. Speaking of changes to the zoning ordinance, Kellam said, “Nothing you have done so far and nothing you can do going forward will cure the procedural and substantive defects in your County-wide zoning proposal other than a complete withdrawal.” Kellam urged the Board to work with the community on the Comprehensive Plan and changes to the zoning code.
Dave Kabler, a Realtor with 40 years of experience on the Shore, told the Supervisors that there is a rising tide of public sentiment against the zoning changes. He said that the Supervisors are wasting time and money on a flawed proposal and called for its immediate withdrawal.
John Ordeman, president of Virginia Eastern Shorekeeper, thanked Supervisors Rick Hubbard and Granville Hogg for attending the zoning forum the previous week, and invited the other Supervisors to watch the video online. “They all gave well based, fact-based presentations on the proposal,” Ordeman told the Supervisors. Speaking of the overwhelming support at the forum for withdrawing the proposal, Ordeman said, “Please listen to the good people — they are against the proposal. They are not against you.”
Donna Bozza, Executive Director of Citizens for a Better Eastern Shore, spoke of the 140 attendees at the forum noting that there was a general consensus that the current proposals need to be withdrawn. CBES has also called for its withdrawal. “As CBES has stated, Northampton County has provided no meaningful presentations on the details of the proposed zoning. Justifications for proposed changes were often not stated or are unsupported. A recent economic development study commissioned by the county cited several impediments to economic development. The zoning now in place was not considered one of them,” Bozza said.
Community activist Ken Dufty raised concerns about bio-mass uses being allowed by-right in areas close to communities, with no provision for neighbors to object. He said that these facilities can be “incredibly dangerous — between 2006 and 2008 over 10 bio-mass facilities exploded or burned to the ground,” Dufty told the Supervisors. He noted that under the new zoning proposal these operations would be permitted by-right in agricultural zones with no notice to nearby residents.
County resident Linda Nordstrom told the Supervisors that she had attended meetings of the Planning Commission, the Board of Supervisors, and the forum last week and concluded that “I have still not heard what the proposed changes would do to improve the community.” She wondered if the Board of Supervisors could refute the claims presented at the forum, and asked the Board to give a reason why it should proceed with the current proposal. After what they have learned in the current controversy, they might want to consider a new direction,” she said.
Local Realtor Bill Parr was the sole speaker in favor of the zoning ordinance changes. As the chairman of the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee, Parr was involved in meetings that recommended increased commercial development on Route 13. “I want to let you know that there are numerous reasonable, well informed citizens and land owners,” Parr said, “who support the ordinance changes.” He urged the Supervisors to move forward with the changes as proposed.
Katherine Horst, a resident of Kiptopeke, asked for withdrawal of the zoning change proposals. “I feel a bit like I am in Washington, DC, talking to our congressmen,” Horst said. “The culture, the land, the people, and the history will be forever changed if you adopt this ordinance.” She then called each supervisor by name and personally asked his consideration.
Another speaker expressed concern about the number of by-right uses that would be added to the zoning ordinance. “When you pass an ordinance with a by-right use you are taking away the rights of other people,” he said. He told the Supervisors that if they were going to pass zoning with so many by-right uses, they owed it to county residents to explain why they were doing it.
County resident and Cape Charles Town Council member Frank Wendell questioned what warranted the deviation from completing the Comprehensive Plan review before working on the zoning code. “It seems that you are putting the cart before the horse,” he said. He asked Supervisors to withdraw the current proposal and follow proper procedure. “Learn from this experience and move forward.”
Tankred Mahler, a new resident of Northampton County, said that the community he came from saw taxes soar as population increased. A greater population means more police, new schools, and more infrastructure requirements. “What you need is a stable tax base with moderate growth,” he said. His wife added that their stay might not be as long as hoped if the zoning changes go through.
Bill Parr lobbying for his CPAC recommendations for commercial development on Rt 13 is not surprising. With his speculative real estate holdings along Rt 13 shown on the County tax map, one can only conclude he is trying to influence the BOS to line his own pockets with no regard for the citizens of the County!
The fact that the BOS is not scheduled to hold a new hearing on Parr’s completely changed proposal for the Kiptopeke intersection project is a slap in the face to all those Kiptopeke citizens who are concerned about this project and how it will affect their homes.
I will refer you to a well documented book, The Best-Laid Plans: How Government Planning Harms Your Quality of Life, Your Pocketbook, and Your Future, by Randal O’Toole. The book explains why Northampton County citizens made a mistake by allowing zoning to ever be established in our county. There may be copies of this book still in our local libraries or you can get a used copy for $4 on Amazon. The real problem is that a few well organized people try to manage growth and socially engineer with their vision of the way they want things to be in our county. We must protect ourselves from these “controllers” who claim to speak for all and know what’s “best” for you. This country was founded on individual property rights. Zoning is government-imposed regulation that limits our freedom. I say shut down the planning department and phase out zoning codes that have caused so many obvious problems. Landowners who are fearful of chicken coops next to their property could replace zoning with covenants. The American dream was based on the freedom to choose our own lifestyles and the opportunity to earn money to afford the choices we have made. Planning and zoning are not what America is supposed to stand for.
Fortunately, for all of us who want to protect our property rights, I will refer you to the US Constitution, supported by the Supreme Court, which gives all of us the right to do just that. An early 20th century court decision, under Republican Chief Justice Wm Howard Taft, made it very clear that your property rights stop at my property line. Northampton County property owners are about to lose that right to protect themselves. Waste sites, chicken houses, bars, off-road vehicle tracks, 24-7 convenience stores, truck stops — all allowed within sight, smell and sound of our houses. The Board of Supervisors says they’re going to vote on this soon. Happy Holidays.
There’s enough red herring being produced by both proponents and opponents of the County’s new zoning proposal to choke a northern elephant seal. Sometimes, my tiny little brain just doesn’t get it. I mean, I scratch my head as these experts try to argue against the new zoning proposal by attempting to make a correlation between lost grasses and scallop beds on the seaside, and the detriment that the new zoning proposal may eventually cause them (now and in the future). But, I thought the seaside grasses and scallop beds were destroyed by storms way back in the 1930s, weren’t they? Not by agriculture, pollution or strip malls. Besides, until you can re-build the shark population, which controls the cow nose ray population, an inshore scallop fishery may always be questionable (yes, those rays can plop down eat a lot of scallops. Ask North Carolina — plus, they really like it so much better in the deeper waters of Elephant Trunk. Oh, and what happens when the next hurricane slams the seaside?).
So, in light of that fallacious example, what are simpletons like me left to believe, or trust? If you want to focus on design or engineering flaws in the new proposal (or the current zoning ordinance and Comprehensive Plan for that matter), there’s certainly fertile ground there, but you have to do better than water quality phantasms and scallops. Another confusing aspect of this argument is just what new damages/dangers are the changes to the zoning ordinance going to cause, that the western watershed hasn’t already mastered (if you’ve ever sailed across the mouth of the Potomac, then you know what I mean). And, if you’re worried about what increased industrial agriculture will do, Bay Act or not, well that cow’s been out the barn for 150 years. On the flip side, there’s no indication or model that the new proposal will do anything to generate meaningful employment (economic development?) Meaningful employment requires a meaningful work force, and the current socio-economic reality does not support that at all. There’s a reason Apple computer is based in Cupertino. From a public relations standpoint, the BOS has to be able to demonstrate, in a concrete manner, how the zoning changes are going to benefit us.
As usual, each side is wrong, each after its own fashion, each using its vision of zoning nirvana as a hammer to beat the other down. The privileged white gentry are against the new zoning proposal, mainly to protect their pristine and elegant creekside views from invasion by the ordinary people. The privileged white developers are for it, mainly to fill their greasy tills, no matter what this means to, or how it devastates the fundamental rural character of the lower shore. All this meaningless chatter will ultimately end in the usual perverse stalemate — it will once again gloss over our horrible inability, or refusal, to accept the savage reality of many who live on the shore. Caught in the middle are the poor, underserved, and underprivileged. When it’s all said and done the working poor will have to pay the price with pills that kill; why not, when long-term plans seem so out of reach, so doomed, why go through the charade of playing the game any longer? Most of us listening to this inane babble can’t help but feel the weight of our non-importance, which is then generalized into personal symbolic significance. Northampton’s poverty is not a textbook villain. It insists on being dealt with on its own terms, and we, of course, refuse to meet, or even negotiate those terms, always for the most selfish reasons.
The Shore may be a good place to retire, but as the Sex Pistols said, there’s no future for anyone else. For kids, there’s only one way out — the county school system. Dudes, just get to college or technical school any way you can. Take a close look at this place — have you really listened to these people? The only savior you can rely on is yourself. Leave, cross the bridge, and never look back. Skip the CBES pig roast, become a vegan, stay thin, and go to the city, whence “heat and light radiates out into the darkness.” Then get a good bike, some Beats and play Sid Vicious’ “My Way” real loud. Do that, and good on ‘ya.
Have always been a fan of Wayne Creed’s diatribes and lectures, and always love to hear him work his musical and performance magic. But want to respond to his latest comments on the Northampton County Board of Supervisors’ unilateral attempt to rewrite our zoning ordinance to what they call a “more business friendly” model.
But before I start and beg your indulgence, let me make one reference modification, just for clarity. Rather than using the term “proponents” for those who want to change the current Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinance to more closely reflect the Ocean City model (as stated by County Administrator Nunez), hereafter I will refer to that group as “the government.” And, rather than calling those of us who prefer to move this county forward in the context of the realities of the lower Eastern Shore “opponents” or “privileged white gentry” as Mr. Creed labels them, in this response I’ll simply call them “the citizens.”
Mr. Creed obviously missed the report submitted to the Northampton County Board of Supervisors by Massachusetts-based Investment Consultant Associates, who were paid $6,750 from the citizens coffers to make recommendations as to how the county could become more competitive and attract new investment from prospective business ventures. The study was commissioned by Charles McSwain, the county’s Economic Development Director. The report laid out a comprehensive and well-detailed plan to reset the breaker on what is perceived as a stagnant business climate, and recommended steps for seeding and fertilizing Northampton County’s economic future. The report was couched in the terms of a “business site selector” and answered the question of why aren’t more businesses looking to move their operations and workforce to Northampton County.
The report concluded that a business, when considering a new site, has a list of “must haves” before they will choose a final site. They require good, highly accredited schools, as well as high quality and locally accessible health care and services. Business “101” demands reliable high speed Internet and dependable cell phone service. The study reported that most serious businesses require access to Interstate Highways (ideally within 5 miles), and basic and affordable infrastructure (including water supplies that are not limited).
(CONTINUED BELOW)
The Board of Supervisors should listen to the report generated by those consultants they hired. While our sewage treatment has not been demonstrated to be failing, our public school system most definitely has. And we are about to lose our health care facilities in this county. Instead of conjuring up a pie in the sky solution to attract new business, we need to concentrate on fundamentals, like providing good education and health care.
OK, so this morning I began to write a response to Wayne Creed’s rant against those concerned about zoning in Northampton County (calling those who only seek a chance to work WITH the Northampton County BOS on possible zoning changes rather than against “privileged white gentry”) when the Verizon service crashed — sound familiar? — and I lost the first half of my comments. But this afternoon, several of my friends came into the shop to tell me how much they liked my response on the Wave, only to have it sink in that the “lost” half had mysteriously made it to this page, so I beg your indulgence while I finish:
Referring to the $6,750 independent report on how to make “Northampton County More Competitive (or business friendly): The report by the paid consultants on how to make Northampton County attractive to new business prospects also gave this county very high marks on its “core industries,” and urged the Board to support, foster, and fuel these economic engines. The cornerstones of sustainable growth in this county, the authors concluded, are agriculture, aquaculture, tourism, and small businesses. Indeed, small business employs 25% of those working in the county, and that percentile is steadily growing. The report also recommended that the Board not pursue more industrial parks like the stagnant STIP in Cape Charles. More interesting, the report did not mention zoning once as a roadblock to attracting new business investment in Northampton County.
Now, after spending that money on this report, you would think that some of the recommendations that were offered by the consultants would at least be given the raise of an administrative eyebrow from those who set this wheel in motion. No such chance. The proposed county-wide zoning targets our core industries by, among other things: rezoning nearly 3,000 acres of agricultural land to residential allowing multiple houses on 1, 3, and 5 acres (along with guest houses now without a glance towards the neighbors; slicing the current 250-foot width of shoreline lots in Oyster and Willis Wharf to less than 60 feet (due to Peter Stith’s magical way to measure this line) with resultant multiple septic systems and docks accompanying each lot (impact to aquaculture); allowing houses to be built on 1/2 acre lots on the waterfront parcels in Oyster and Willis Wharf and other seaside towns; encouraging uses on agricultural land such as prisons, waste incinerators (waste-related) biofuels refineries, large scale chicken houses (up to 20,000 birds), race tracks, migrant labor camps, wastewater treatment plants, manure storage, and other uses, many without requiring notice to neighbors; and encouraging paving and strip malls along Route 13, the only area where our sole source aquifer can get recharged from rainwater. Note also Chairman LeMond has announced that the Board will eliminate Agricultural and Forestal Districts when they come up for renewal, forcing many farmland owners to pay up to 5 times the real estate taxes they pay now. While this may benefit real estate entrepreneurs like Mr. Parr, it certainly is no way to support our main core industry.
One more thing, Mr. Creed: While you may paint those of us who wish to be more involved in a rezoning process as “privileged white gentry” (a broad-brush stroke that is not your norm), many of those on this side are very upset that the county is banning single-wide mobile homes from many zoning districts, and, while being a blatant violation of the Fair Housing Act, this rezoning will probably not affect the “privileged” but most definitely will affect many others not deserving of this denial of affordable housing options.
Again, the Board needs to withdraw this insane attack on this county’s environmental, social, and economic future which is apparently driven by special interests at the expense of PUBLIC interest, and sit down with those of us who pay their salaries to work out our differences. We are waiting at the table — we’ll even pull out a chair for you.
Ken Dufty
Thanks Ken, will take it on advisement.