Prince William

Citizens for Balanced Growth

Category: Stone Haven (2012-2015)/Brentswood (page 1 of 4)

Official county information on “Stone Haven”

 Official county information on “Stone Haven” residential development which reprises unpopular 2006 Brentswood project.

County Planning Staff report on Stone Haven presented at Prince William County Planning Commission hearing on Stone Haven 3 September 2014

Official information on Stone Haven from Prince William County Government website

County’s pending comprehensive plan amendments (CPAs), including “Stone Haven,” “Wheeler Estate Property,” “Bell Property”

Read More

Nov 2015 Email To Citizens Re. Stone Haven: More Houses, Ever-Increasing Taxes, Ever-Worsening Services … Had Enough Yet?

fwd_-8-dec-stone-haven_-marching-to-4000-more-houses-ever-increasing-taxes-ever-worsening-services2
Text Excerpts
Read More

“Stone Haven vote waiting on new Brentsville supervisor”

Bull Run Observer reports 7 Oct BOCS [Board of County Supervisors] decision to defer Stone Haven vote. Chairman Stewart focuses only on Stone Haven's impact on schools, ignoring its impact on taxes, roads, property values, etc. Supervisor Candland says school board this year said BOCS had approved too many homes, but now is backing Stone Haven. Candland asks if school district is looking at alternatives, should Stone Haven be denied. School Board Chairman explains schools "were relying" on this site, but have options to buy other sites "but no money." Pete Dolan, representing Stone Haven developers, claims Stone Haven would produce less traffic than commercial development of the site, without clarifying and documenting what the various impacts would be on rush hour traffic flows. Read More

E-mail titled “Next Steps After Stone Haven Deferral, Including Rivergate 14 Oct” sent to local citizens and news media

BOCS final vote on Stone Haven deferred to Jan 2015; date TBD. Prince William Station, Pioneer Assemblage residential developments upcoming as well. Count for these three developments now "up to at least 4,450-4,950 new houses multiplied by 3 people and about 2 cars per house." Western Prince William County residents urged to make "common cause with others in county" who face similarly overcrowded roads and schools due to tax-negative residential overdevelopment, starting with Rivergate in Woodbridge, Supervisor Principi's district. Citizens urged to vote in 23 Dec 2014 special election to choose new Brentsville supervisor; candidates' positions on balanced growth "in their own words." Arguments in favor of Stone Haven, denials that Stone Haven, other big residential projects are tax-negative refuted. Bristow Beat pro-developer bias on Stone Haven reporting described; perhaps "this one-sidedness" has something "to do with a large percentage of advertising revenues coming from residential developers." Read More

“UPDATED: Prince William supervisors defer vote on Stone Haven”

InsideNova reports 7 Oct BOCS decision to defer Stone Haven vote. "Confusion about whether Stone Haven would relieve or exacerbate high-school overcrowding" noted. Brentsville District Supervisor candidate Jeanine Lawson urges delay on vote, but reserves final judgement on Stone Haven, awaiting "more information about whether the school division is prepared to purchase a school site if Stone Haven is not approved." Read More

Speech to Prince William BOCS hearing on Stone Haven

PWCBG 2014 fiscal impact analysis of Stone Haven shows that "Stone Haven will be almost $1,400 tax negative per house per year, compared to PWCBG’s 2012-13 analysis that showed residential developments in the county on average about $1,500 tax negative per house per year." Stone Haven and Prince William Station, all things being equal, will cost county taxpayers $5.1-$5.8M per year. Stone Haven developer promises empty land for school and ball fields in exchange for thousands of tax-negative houses. Wouldn't it be much cheaper for county to just buy the empty land for schools and ball fields outright without thousands of tax-negative houses costing taxpayers millions of dollars each year? County urged to take five steps to seriously compete for the first time with Fairfax, Loudoun, Arlington counties, etc to attract hi-paying, hi-tax revenue commercial businesses to county. Read More

Fliers distributed Sep-Oct 2014 by PWCBG regarding Stone Haven/upcoming Prince William Station

StoneHavenFlier

Read More

“Covington’s Resignation Leaves Brentsville District without Representation for Stone Haven Vote”; reaction by candidates to replace Covington — Lawson, Jacobs

by Stacy Shaw, Bristow Beat

September 23, 2014

bristowbeat.com-Covingtons_Resignation_Leaves_Brentsville_District_without_Representation_for_Stone_Haven_Vote

Note:  At a meeting of the Nokesville Civic Association the evening of 25 September 2014 attended by PWCBG representatives, the Association adopted by unanimous voice vote a resolution that it will formally request the Prince William Board of County Supervisors to delay the Stone Haven vote and any other votes significantly affecting Brentsville District (Bristow-area) until a new supervisor for Brentsville District is seated.…

Read More

E-mail sent to local citizens, Bristow Beat, and other local news media by PWCBG’s Ralph Stephenson on 20 September 2014

Eight "outrageous lies developers are telling to sell residential development" and how those lies raise taxes and corrupt local politics, perverting "public policy to very narrow private ends." Pro-Stone Haven and consistently pro-developer County Supervisors Stewart, Covington, Nohe, and Jenkins have received over $1M from developers overall and over $40K from the realtor, developer, and likely homebuilder for Stone Haven. All four should recuse themselves from the Stone Haven vote. Vastly overvalued developer proffers and open space are "tantamount to fraud." PWCBG urges citizens to speak out and retake their local government, noting that "in democracies, the people tend to get the kind of government they've worked for and earned by being informed and vigilant." Read More

“30+ speak out on pros and cons of Stone Haven proposal”

County Planning Commission recommends to Board of County Supervisors by 5-2 vote that Stone Haven be approved. Stone Haven projected to add 892 students to county schools. Speakers opposed note that Stone Haven is "tax-negative" and by rezoning more land away from commercial will further reduce future jobs potential of county; will also further overcrowd schools and roads. Speakers in favor of Stone Haven claim improved roads, praise proffers/high school; many are realtors/developers. Neabsco Commissioner says "residential lots are disgraceful," "teeny"; he questions having only five-foot sideyards, noting he does not support the residential portion of Stone Haven. Occoquan Commissioner doubts veracity of Stone Haven's open space calculations and that they are in accord with county policy. Read More
Older posts