sprawl – Care4Suffolk

Steering Suffolk Towards More Warehouses and Sprawl

Care4Suffolk — Tue, 12 Nov 2024 06:23:00 +0000

When the 2045 Comprehensive Plan draft came out, many people had the initial reaction that it was not actually about the needs of the people of Suffolk. Digging deeper into the plan and watching staff presentations about it has made it clear that the priority is actually for Suffolk to shoulder regional goals. Why has the City spent over three years, spending taxpayer money, tailoring its long-term growth plans to the needs of the Port of Virginia and the region?

Looking at the 2045 Plan’s steering committee might answer this question. It consists of selected individuals that are supposed to “help guide the process for and substance of the plan.” Of the 24 members, about half are either: not from Suffolk, have strong ties to development-focused regional organizations (such as Hampton Roads Alliance), and/or are in the real estate business. Nine members belong to at least one regional organization, with five of those currently or previously holding board or other leadership positions. One member is a Vice President with the Port of Virginia with his role listed as Port Centric Logistics. Another is a sitting council member representing the regional realtor’s association.

In addition, the person hired to manage the 2045 Comprehensive Plan previously worked as the Deputy Executive Director of the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, with one duty being to develop a “program to increase the region’s inventory of shovel-ready economic development sites.”

Our Deputy City Manager who oversees the Planning Department (responsible for the creating the comprehensive plan), also has a strong regional background. He previously worked as Business Development Manager with the Hampton Roads Alliance and is on the Suffolk Division Board of the Hampton Roads Chamber.

We have nothing against these individuals personally or Suffolk being part of the broader Hampton Roads community. However, there is a problem when individuals are selected by the City of Suffolk to represent the citizens, but instead they prioritize regional goals. The Port of Virginia wants more warehouses and workforce housing, Suffolk has the land they need, and the objective of the 2045 Comprehensive Plan is clearly to make it available.

Suffolk residents provided plenty of feedback letting city planners and managers know that they don’t want a congested warehouse city. We’re already an important “regional partner” with our existing 21 million square feet of warehouse space (which we’re having enough problems handling.)

We are also a critical partner with the lakes of Suffolk providing drinking water to many in Hampton Roads. Previous comprehensive plans explicitly state the need to keep these areas low density to protect this precious resource. Now our planners want expansion of the most intense types of development further into our drinking water watersheds.

The deck has been stacked against Suffolk’s citizens’ right to control their future through the regional influence in this plan. Regional collaboration is one thing, but we should not be accepting the role of subordinate. We are asking City Council to be bold on November 20th by voting ‘no’ to adopting the 2045 Comprehensive Plan and keeping the focus on what is best for the current residents of Suffolk. You can let them know if you feel the same way at council@suffolkva.us.

Please sign Care4Suffolk’s petition asking City Council to oppose the 2045 Comprehensive Plan.

Servants of the Port

Care4Suffolk — Tue, 25 Jun 2024 13:59:46 +0000

The May 1st joint Planning Commission/City Council work session on the 2045 Comprehensive Plan concluded with uncertainty and a clear discomfort with the size of the proposed new Growth Area and the amount of land designated for “Employment Centers” (and identified by the color purple on the land use map).

Future Land Use Map June 18, 2024. No longer distinguishes between current and future Growth Areas, so the added Growth Areas have been circled in red by us.

During the recent June 18th Planning Commission Work Session about the 2045 Comprehensive Plan Draft, there was the impression that despite a reduction in the proposed Rt. 460 Growth Area, the amount of purple on the maps is still making people nervous. Planning and city management spent a lot of time trying to provide some assurance about this and presented some new twists on justifying more “Employment Centers.”

Comparison of warehouse development over time.

One new tactic was to give sort of a history of warehouse development, showing that the current industrial areas have been built out over time. It seemed they were trying to demonstrate that some of the purple areas within the current growth areas aren’t new and that we need more to support the Port’s needs. What this part of the presentation really demonstrated was how much warehouse space Suffolk already has! We already know we have the most in all of Hampton Roads: 21,683,290 square feet!

Data was presented from March 20, 2024 City Council Work Session Packet, p. 69.

There was also a pie chart to compare the percentages of the Future Land Use Types as they are recommending them. It seemed that they wanted to show that because Rural Agriculture and Parks & Open Space are the highest in percentage versus other land use types, the purple “Employment Centers” are insignificant–nothing to worry about!

Land Use by acreage - demonstrates that small percentages of intense development can have huge impacts on infrastructure and quality of life.

However, there was no clarification that a lot of land in the Rural Agriculture category are areas that used to fall under the land use types of Forestry and Wetlands, including the Great Dismal Swamp. Another point they never mention is that just because land falls in an agriculture category or zoning, does not mean it’s actually tillable land that can be farmed.

What is really telling with the pie chart though is that it really demonstrates that small percentages of intense development can have huge impacts on infrastructure and quality of life. Most people see and feel this everyday here now (except some city planners and managers, apparently!)

We may have a lot of open space, but our current growth areas are struggling under the recent growth and it seems city planners’ only answer is to continue letting that bleed out into our unprepared rural areas.

Slide explaining new secondary use of Employment Centers.

Another curious new effort to improve the image of “Employment Centers” is to allow for a new “secondary use” of vacant “Employment Center” buildings (of which there should be none if the need is so great!) This new use is labeled “Compatible Adaptive Reuse of Existing Employment Center Buildings.” It’s simple! The intent is to “Allow for the adaptive reuse of existing vacant buildings to non-employment center uses that are compatible with adjacent uses, building characteristics, site design and facility location. Such uses may include but are not limited to: indoor or outdoor recreation, public gathering and places of assembly. “(Page 50)

The City’s idea is to keep the land use ‘flexible’ by allowing almost any type of non-residential use to go there. This completely contradicts the ‘predictable’ part of the planning they say they are trying to accomplish.

Halfway through the 30-plus slide presentation, there was a somewhat bizarre attempt to focus on talking about Smart Growth. (Actually, not really talking about it so much as just using the phrase.)

We have yet to see one time where anyone who brings up Smart Growth actually explains what it is or specifies any Smart Growth principles they may be referring to. It’s especially odd considering that when you search for the phrase “Smart Growth” in the 2045 comp plan draft it comes up zero times. (Even in the 2026 and 2035 Comp Plans it only comes up a handful of times, and mostly about school facility planning.)

One of the main Smart Growth principles is to contain development where infrastructure is already in place. Two city planners mentioned Smart Growth and then proceeded to talk about extending water, sewer, and road improvements into current agricultural lands, so that they are ready for development which will make them more attractive to developers to build there. That is NOT Smart Growth, that is sprawl!

With each new meeting, the City presents information that addresses what they see as our (the public’s) main concerns. However, they are missing the crux of the issue. The citizens of Suffolk already told the City in the 7,500+ unique comments what we want. Overwhelmingly, people are fed up with the handling of development in the last decade. Instead of actually LISTENING to the citizens, they pat themselves on the back for gathering the comments, and then go on to do more of the same. It is not what we asked for and it isn’t what we want. According to the City Planner giving the presentation, not everyone will be happy with the plan, which is true, but there are clearly other ‘stakeholders’ more important to them than the citizens. The City is intent on making Suffolk a servant of the Port over the wishes of the people.

Slide showing the public comments the City received throughout the process.

Please sign our petition to urge City Council to vote ‘NO’ to the new 2045 Comprehensive Plan.

Sprawl for Suffolk in the 2045 Comprehensive Plan

Care4Suffolk — Thu, 21 Mar 2024 05:39:00 +0000

The City of Suffolk has been working on the new Comprehensive Plan for two years and it is expected to be voted on this year. It will be implemented immediately if approved by City Council. During the two-year process, the public advertising for the new plan prominently mentioned Smart Growth. It was on the website, the handouts, and was incorporated into the tagline: Sharing the Vision – Smart Growth to Build a Diverse City.

When the new draft was publicized in February of this year, I was excited to check it out and raced to see how they incorporated Smart Growth into the new Comprehensive Plan draft. Spoiler alert: they didn’t. Despite the advertising, ‘Smart Growth’ doesn’t appear in the new draft even once.

Smart Growth is an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) program started roughly 30 years ago. You can read more about it here and here. Essentially, it is a set of guiding principles for development and conservation intended to enhance people’s health and natural environment while making cities more diverse and economically strong. It strives to create communities where people want to live, work and spend time. It is an approach that cities and towns around the country are using to promote a better community for their citizens.

Below are the Principles of Smart Growth:

• Mix land uses

• Take advantage of compact building design

• Create a range of housing opportunities and choices

• Create walkable neighborhoods

• Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place

• Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas

• Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities

• Provide a variety of transportation choices

• Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost effective

• Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions

There are so many ways this new Comprehensive Plan is contrary to Smart Growth, but let’s begin with the huge expansion to the Growth Areas. City managers are looking to expand the Growth Area in Suffolk by nearly 25%, which is unprecedented in previous Comprehensive Plans. This will create more sprawl, which is detrimental to strong, inward growth – a key facet of Smart Growth.

This Smart Growth principle is simple: limiting growth to areas with existing infrastructure will save money long-term with less infrastructure upkeep. Additionally, focusing growth inward helps bring more businesses and housing options to the downtown area. Infill development is building on unused and underutilized land. It is aimed at areas with existing transportation and utility infrastructure. It repurposes or replaces existing buildings, parking lots, or other impervious areas to add homes and businesses near the center of cities.

When the City of Suffolk began expansion in the North Suffolk area, new growth and development ended up there instead of focusing in the downtown area. It is cheaper and easier for developers to build on farmland. It is flat, clear, and cheap, allowing them to maximize their profits. But the city manager’s job is not to maximize profits for developers. The city needs to partner with developers willing to invest in downtown. It isn’t as easy, but it will lead to a more vibrant and healthier Suffolk in the long run. Instead, city management is pushing for development to the west side of Suffolk. Will we end up with a West Suffolk as well as a North Suffolk? What does this mean for Downtown?

Other ways the new Comprehensive Plan doesn’t follow Smart Growth:

Create walkable neighborhoods: When you look at the new developments that have been springing up throughout Suffolk, walkable is not a descriptive word you would associate with most of them. Many do have sidewalks (more infrastructure for the city to maintain) but they don’t provide any place to go. Some do connect with a couple of commercial businesses, but by no means does it make the community walkable. A walkable community is when you can walk to schools, work, churches, shopping, parks, restaurants, etc. and there are very few new developments in Suffolk that meet this principle.

Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place. Walkable communities tend to have this by the very nature of the mixed use areas in close proximity. Communities are not just houses in one area, they are a variety of homes, surrounded by the activities (mentioned in the walkable neighborhood) that the people use every day.

Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas. Suburban and industrial sprawl destroy natural open spaces, farmland and critical environmental areas. Below you can see the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area (CBPA). The City of Suffolk already has its current Growth Area entirely within the CBPA and this new Comprehensive Plan will extend the Growth Area to cover even more of it. Development in this area pollutes our waterways, which impacts the sea life (an important source of food) in the Chesapeake Bay as well as the surrounding rivers. It also negatively impacts the reservoirs in Suffolk that provide drinking water to the citizens of Suffolk, Norfolk, and Portsmouth. The plan’s Appendices list 37 waterways in Suffolk that have impaired water quality. Previous versions of the Comprehensive Plan acknowledge the importance of minimizing development near these critical waterways, but the new draft has done an about-face and is encouraging development on these natural resources instead.

Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions.

City planners say that this plan represents a combination of what the community and the “stakeholders” (i.e. developers) want for the future of Suffolk. They say everyone isn’t going to get everything they want! However, this new plan is contrary to the public feedback the city received while working on this new draft. If this isn’t what the public wants, then that means the city managers are listening more to the stakeholders than they are to the public. Developers are getting what they want at the expense of the citizens.

This new plan will exacerbate suburban sprawl and encourage huge swaths of land to be rezoned for warehouses. This sprawl will negatively impact Downtown Suffolk by creating vast new growth to the West of downtown. This expanded Growth Area and these new developments do not align with Smart Growth. So why did city managers include Smart Growth in all the publications? Did they start down the Smart Growth path, but then make a 180° when it didn’t match with what developers wanted?

It seems that our city management doesn’t respect what the citizens want. If we do nothing, then nothing changes. However, if you don’t like this new plan – if you don’t want to see more warehouses and the continued sprawl in Suffolk – you need to act. We all need to act. This process will soon move through the Planning Commission and on to City Council by this summer. City Council will then vote to approve or not approve the new comprehensive plan. If you don’t want this for the future of Suffolk, let City Council and the Mayor know where you stand.

Let City Council know what you think about this new growth area: council@suffolkva.us

Michael D. Duman, Mayor

mayor@suffolkva.us

Phone: 757-514-4009

Lue R. Ward, Jr., Vice Mayor

(Nansemond Borough)

nansemond@suffolkva.us

Phone: 757-377-6929

Shelley Butler Barlow,

Council Member

(Chuckatuck Borough)

chuckatuck@suffolkva.us

Phone: 757-346-8355

Leroy Bennett, Council Member
(Cypress Borough)
cypress@suffolkva.us
Phone: 757-407-3750

Timothy J. Johnson, Council Member
(Holy Neck Borough)
holyneck@suffolkva.us
Phone: 757-407-0556

Roger W. Fawcett, Council Member
(Sleepy Hole Borough)
sleepyhole@suffolkva.us
Phone: 757-377-8641

John Rector, Council Member
(Suffolk Borough)
suffolk@suffolkva.us
Phone: 757-407-1953

LeOtis Williams, Council Member

(Whaleyville Borough)

whaleyville@suffolkva.us

Phone: 757-402-7100