We taxpayers and voters in Crozet when the Master Plan was developed participated in many many well-attended, civilized, and productive meetings and creation of the final draft. The one that the county, under pressure from developers pushing the ” all growth is good” mind-set, discarded.
I agree Ann Malek hasn’t done what she promised to do. It seems the best liar always wins in politics.
Thank you Thomas, for doing this. The way you presented the facts, and your opinions, is typical of how you have always been honest and straight-forward over these many years. I’d vote for you! I’d even campaign for you!
PLEASE STOP THE GROWTH IN CROZET AND MAINTAIN WHAT WE HAVE. IF TAXES CONTINUE TO RISE, I’LL BE FORCED TO SELL OR MAKE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS. IF THESE PEOPLE WANT A “BIG” CITY THEN MAYBE CONSIDER MOVING TO ONE AND LEAVE CROZET ALONE, PLEASE.
Tom– An excellent presentation of the bait & switch tactics of the AC Planning Commission. Having witnessed our old neighborhood in Fort Hunt/Mt. Vernon VA transformed from quiet rural/suburban to a completely traffic-gridlocked, infilled disaster area, we know all too well to what extent AC’s current options will adversely affect Crozet and surrounding environs.
After attending the open session at WAHS wherein Crozetians were invited to offer their opinions and vision for the area’s future development, we came away with two conclusions: 1) this was a diversionary tactic by the planning commission to “involve” residents, when in actuality they had no intention of altering their developer-driven plans; and 2) as non-residents, the young planners in attendance who shuffled us from one project table to another had no skin in the game, and presented an aura of faux-concern when issues were raised–enthusiastically cheering our input, but then utterly ignoring it in subsequent meetings.
We were particularly galled when, attending an online session, I raised the question of how the necessary supporting infrastructure would be planned and implemented. Their response: “Oh, that’s a DOT issue.” i.e. The planning commission is happy to play footsie with developers without a thought as to how the heck all the new (and old) folks are going to get to, around, and through Crozet.
Revert back to the original Master Plan, then reassess in 25 years. Thanks for your continued vigilance, and for your succinct encapsulation of the ramifications embodied by each option.
Sorry for my comments asking where the AC44 Phase 1 website was, on other posts on this site, etc… I see the 6 options here. I will need to think thru them before voting. Thanks for sharing all of this AC44 info in a structured and logical way.
We taxpayers and voters in Crozet when the Master Plan was developed participated in many many well-attended, civilized, and productive meetings and creation of the final draft. The one that the county, under pressure from developers pushing the ” all growth is good” mind-set, discarded.
I agree Ann Malek hasn’t done what she promised to do. It seems the best liar always wins in politics.
Thank you Thomas, for doing this. The way you presented the facts, and your opinions, is typical of how you have always been honest and straight-forward over these many years.
I’d vote for you! I’d even campaign for you!
Tom thank you for your good work.
PLEASE STOP THE GROWTH IN CROZET AND MAINTAIN WHAT WE HAVE. IF TAXES CONTINUE TO RISE, I’LL BE FORCED TO SELL OR MAKE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS.
IF THESE PEOPLE WANT A “BIG” CITY THEN MAYBE CONSIDER MOVING TO ONE AND LEAVE CROZET ALONE, PLEASE.
Option 6 has no details upon which it can be evaluated.
Provide pertinent examples!
Tom–
An excellent presentation of the bait & switch tactics of the AC Planning Commission. Having witnessed our old neighborhood in Fort Hunt/Mt. Vernon VA transformed from quiet rural/suburban to a completely traffic-gridlocked, infilled disaster area, we know all too well to what extent AC’s current options will adversely affect Crozet and surrounding environs.
After attending the open session at WAHS wherein Crozetians were invited to offer their opinions and vision for the area’s future development, we came away with two conclusions: 1) this was a diversionary tactic by the planning commission to “involve” residents, when in actuality they had no intention of altering their developer-driven plans; and 2) as non-residents, the young planners in attendance who shuffled us from one project table to another had no skin in the game, and presented an aura of faux-concern when issues were raised–enthusiastically cheering our input, but then utterly ignoring it in subsequent meetings.
We were particularly galled when, attending an online session, I raised the question of how the necessary supporting infrastructure would be planned and implemented. Their response: “Oh, that’s a DOT issue.” i.e. The planning commission is happy to play footsie with developers without a thought as to how the heck all the new (and old) folks are going to get to, around, and through Crozet.
Revert back to the original Master Plan, then reassess in 25 years. Thanks for your continued vigilance, and for your succinct encapsulation of the ramifications embodied by each option.
Sorry for my comments asking where the AC44 Phase 1 website was, on other posts on this site, etc… I see the 6 options here. I will need to think thru them before voting. Thanks for sharing all of this AC44 info in a structured and logical way.