In eastern Henrico, a fear of fading farms

In eastern Henrico, a fear of fading farms

BOB BROWN/TIMES-DISPATCH

Richmond’s skyline is visible from the hill overlooking Tree Hill Farm, where 2,770 homes, town houses and condos are planned.

» 45 Comments | Post a Comment

SLIDESHOW: Varina's future

When Nelda Snyder grew up near the James River in eastern Henrico County in the 1940s, going to the city meant a long trip through the country on roads so narrow that cars almost scraped sides when they passed.

She still lives at Arrahatteck, named for the Indians who lived there before the first English settlers arrived in the early 1600s, but at age 73 she finds her idyllic slice of woodland situated between an interstate and a toll road.

Change is coming. It's as clear as the rumble of truck traffic in the distance and the for-sale sign on a soybean field.

How it will affect the rural areas of the Varina District has been one of the hot topics in the 2026 Comprehensive Plan, which is up for final approval Tuesday by the Henrico Board of Supervisors. Envision Henrico and the Partnership for Smarter Growth have asked supporters to attend the meeting to protest redesignation of Varina Farm for Suburban Mixed Use development.

In response to residents' concerns, county planners have recommended adding agriculture as an economic objective in the plan and backing it up with policies that support agriculture for current and future generations.

William Gallmeyer, 72, would appreciate the help. He's one of the few farmers still trying to survive in eastern Henrico. When he grew up on Millers Lane, he could count the nearby houses on one hand and knew everybody who lived in them.

Now, White Oak Village shopping center is at the end of the street where he operates his farm stand. Housing developments encroach on his 97 acres. He rents about 250 additional acres to plant more strawberries, pumpkins and vegetables.

"New people that move in the area, a lot of them are customers here," he said as he showed rows of tomato plants. "That part is good, as far as the population increase. But they're taking away the farmland. Development is taking over the East End as well as it does in the West End.

"It's a piece here and a piece there that's still left," he said. "Every year, I lose another one.

"Farming is my life. It's always been my love, but it is more or less a labor of love. You're not going to get rich, and you're lucky if you survive."

Because of Varina's historic sites, environmental protected areas and parkland, eastern Henrico will never be as densely developed as western Henrico. Almost 23 percent of the 81,000 acres in the district are protected in some way, said Planning Director R. Joseph Emerson Jr. About 31 percent remain zoned as rural residential/prime agricultural in the 2026 plan, compared with 36 percent in the 2010 plan. Combining the two agricultural designations into one category caused concerns, however.

"The big fear among Varinians," Nelson said, "is they don't have prime agriculture in its original form put into the comprehensive plan. To many, even though it may not be intentional, it seems to say, 'Here is the checkered flag for the development of Varina similar to areas of the county already developed.'

"To us, that is not an acceptable way to go."

. . .

Snyder's path into the city illustrates the changes that have already taken place. She still follows the two-lane Osborne Turnpike, but now it takes her past more small-acreage houses than farm fields. If already-approved communities are built along the river corridor, thousands of new residents will arrive within the next five years at Tree Hill and Wilton on the James.

As originally planned, both communities already would have been under construction by now, but continuing economic problems in the county and the nation have put such big housing developments in limbo.

Wilton, located where the Pocahontas Parkway (state Route 895) crosses the James River, is on hold until the economy improves, said Daniel T. Schmitt, president of HHH Communities. He denied rumors that the property is for sale.

"We, like anyone else, have listened to people that have expressed interest in the property," he said. "If something made sense for our company, we may pursue that. As of this moment, it's not on the market. Our overwhelming desire is to move that project forward and develop that within the next two or three years."

At Tree Hill, which is closer to the city on Osborne Turnpike and adjacent to Rocketts Landing, "we're being patient to let the housing market recover," said Russell T. Aaronson III, president of Gray Land and Development Co. "I would not call us on hold. We're working with the county on a daily basis to work through the infrastructure challenges. We're as high on the project as we've ever been."

Henrico requires developers to widen roads and extend water and sewer lines needed for their projects. Along the state Route 5 corridor, "it is all undersized for everything they've envisioned for Varina," Aaronson said

"We're still working through the infrastructure and waiting for the market to define itself," he said. "It may be we're on the brink of a new lifestyle. The days of McMansions may be over for a while."

So far, the major development on the property has been a six-figure investment in stabilizing the manor house. Workers have rebuilt part of the brick foundation and replaced the roof and many of its supporting beams.

Plans for Tree Hill call for 2,770 single-family homes, townhouses and condos; 1.16 million square feet of office and commercial space; and 250 acres of open space on a 531-acre parcel. A few million-dollar houses will command the ridge line with its view of the city, but most of the project will be in the range of $200,000 to $400,000, Aaronson said. Wilton on the James has plans for 3,209 homes on its 1,200 acres, also with a commitment to open space.

Adding that many commuters to Route 5 could create serious traffic tie-ups heading into Richmond.

"You can't widen the city streets in Richmond. There's no room to do that," said Stewart Schwartz, executive director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth in Northern Virginia and a Richmond resident. County planners anticipate that Wilton residents, because they'll have an interchange on Pocahontas Parkway, will pay the toll to cross the river to Interstate 95 north.

. . .

To Nelda and her husband, Buzz Snyder, who have protected more than 100 of their 150 acres from development through a conservation easement, the two planned communities are "good development and in a good spot. Wilton was beautifully planned. I would rather see that built there than a lot of other things."

Developments like Tree Hill and Wilton are supported by two new land-use categories added to the proposed 2026 Comprehensive Plan. Though both of those developments were created by modifying the zoning for Urban Mixed Use projects, the two new categories of Traditional Neighborhood Development and Suburban Mixed Use will compactly mix housing with office/retail space and require 15 percent to 20 percent open space.

The new classifications have been applied to all of the land along the river between the Tree Hill and Wilton. Where Interstate 295 crosses the river, Varina Farm also has been designated Suburban Mixed Use. Curles Neck Farm, at the eastern end of Route 5, is still designated as rural residential/prime agricultural land, which would require 1-acre lots if it were developed. County planners point out that the land-use plan does not change current zoning of any of the properties.

Varina Farm's change in land use has generated the most heat.

On the one hand, Andy Edmunds, who works as location manager for the Virginia Film Office and lives near Osborne Landing, says he wants to protect "this unique nature of Varina being so rural within such close proximity in the urban area." Yet, he recognizes that "you've got 895 and 295 coming across the river. To deny that the intersection exists is kind of silly. [The plan] just spells out that something's going to happen at those cross-points."

On the other hand, Varina Farm is an active farm surrounded by agricultural land. Just a mile upriver, the Snyders object to the possibility of development so close to them and so far from anything else.

"It's leapfrogging," Nelda Snyder said. She and others have campaigned unsuccessfully for a program allowing the purchase of development rights to provide income for farmers while protecting agricultural areas from development.

To Nicole Anderson Ellis, who lives along the Osborne Turnpike between 295 and 895, the change at Varina Farm means "I would then be considered infill. Once there's high density beyond you, you're out of luck," she said.

Gatewood Stoneman, whose family has owned Varina Farm for nearly 100 years, said she had no plans to sell or develop the property, but if it is ever developed "they ought to thank us for wanting something a little bit nicer than what's going in all the time."

Henrico's rich history has the attention of Henry Nelson, 66, who grew up in Varina.

The second English settlement in Virginia was at Henricus in eastern Henrico, now part of Chesterfield County because of a change in the river channel. When John Rolfe married Pocahontas and discovered that money could be made from tobacco, it was in eastern Henrico. Civil War battles in eastern Henrico protected the Confederate capital of Richmond from federal troops.

Nelson wants the comprehensive plan to support a historic-preservation ordinance that would require historic-property owners to give notice before they destroy a site so others can save it.

The Snyders also cite history as a reason for keeping Varina the way it is.

"The pattern for everywhere is growth," Nelda Snyder said, "but I hope that here in Henrico the supervisors and the majority of the citizens value preserving other things just as much as they do having good growth -- preserving farms, preserving spaces that make the growth a good place to be and don't destroy it."


Contact Katherine Calos at (804) 649-6433 or .

Advertisement

 
View More: slideshow,rural,development,comprehensive plan,agriculture,
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by oneuser on August 11, 2009 at 12:04 pm

If this farmland is going to be developed lets be fair about it. Why not charge cash proffers equal to the expense county taxpayer will pay for additional roads,schools, etc.The builder and developer have been getting a free ride long enough on other taxpayers money. Make them pay for all the roads and schools,etc they create a need for.Taxes on a new home do not begin to pay for these services.

Flag Comment Posted by Ann2 on August 11, 2009 at 9:33 am

I am afraid that the Henrico Supervisors have northern Virginia envy! Northern Va. is nothing to envy -please let most of eastern Henrico remain farmland. Local produce is beneficial to Richmond and to Virginia consumers. Once farmland gets developed there is no going back.  Please reconsider, and block efforts to lose this precious resource. Please speak up, Varina!

Flag Comment Posted by a63roni on August 11, 2009 at 6:28 am

I say forcus on redeveloping Williamsburg Rd, and a gas station at Laburnum & Rt 5.

Flag Comment Posted by 12steprevenge on August 10, 2009 at 11:34 pm

Yeah, whatever, Resident Grammarian.

Flag Comment Posted by wahoo2010 on August 10, 2009 at 11:32 pm

More like: YAWNED.  Night night.

Flag Comment Posted by 12steprevenge on August 10, 2009 at 9:27 pm

wahoo: PWNED

Flag Comment Posted by wahoo2010 on August 10, 2009 at 4:17 pm

I care.

Flag Comment Posted by arg on August 10, 2009 at 3:54 pm

Having participated in public meetings alongside other concerned Henrico residents from all districts, and read the associated media coverage for the last three years, I’m disappointed that little change has been made to the 2026 Comprehensive Plan draft. Watching residents voice their concern over this year after year to little or no positive result doesn’t feel like democracy to me.

The environmental threats posed by massive developments placed along the James River watershed vie with the potential increase in traffic related pollution to spell unsustainable growth in super-sized smoggy, sludgy letters. The environmental threat to the James and the Bay requires much more serious consideration- simply adhering to State or Federal regulations in this case won’t suffice if there is to be anything left for future generations. Residents need to ask that a higher standard be required in any riverfront development. No need to compare best farm management practices to the lawn chem./vehicle emissions resulting from 6000 new residents on even a 500 acre parcel. Farming wins hands down as lower impact. But in Henrico I expect even more asphalt to be encouraged, and later to be taxed for that which we did not want.

But to me, the most disheartening part of the plan lies in the fact that residents are expected to cheer when more redundant retail or high density housing is proposed to take the place of just what makes Henrico so irreplaceable. Lands originally inhabited by the Powhatans when first visited by Christopher Newport, and later by Captain John Smith, or originally farmed by John Rolfe and Pocahontas. What’s the answer for that? That they lived in or visited other places too? That the best and highest use of these sites is a big-box store or human bee-hive of condominiums? Worse yet, in planning, Henrico does not recognize properties listed in the State and National Registers of Historic Places, instead calling them “historic areas” and building on through by quoting the Dillon Law and talking about “land rights”. This seems to refer to the rights of developers alone. Historic preservation is said to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, but look at the legacy of loss. Over 85% of the historic resources in Henrico’s 1976 published inventory are now gone forever. Preservation here has involved moving historic buildings to outlying counties, or surrounding them with a sea of asphalt to become county used buildings. To garner county support of the historic preservation of privately owned property or for land conservation is nearly impossible.

What of the rights of those who live here now to breath relatively clean air- or drive without grid-lock? The majority of posts made voicing anti-preservation sentiments have obviously been made by those who profit from development: builders. All hail the almighty dollar. It certainly would be helpful if more residents took part in local government and became aware of this plan’s potential impact on their children’s future and the planet as a whole.

Flag Comment Posted by David on August 10, 2009 at 1:48 pm

Isn’t the timing interesting? We get the new development plan just before the census in 2010, which will change drmatically the make-up of the Board of Supervisors.  Their going away present, so to speak.

Flag Comment Posted by Will on August 10, 2009 at 11:42 am

“Again, that is not the only option. There is no environmental scientist alive that will agree that farming is better for the environment than simply allowing it to return to its natural state.“

Well sure but what’s the point?—when the landowner is a working farmer with a family what are his options? If he sells his land, the highest bidder will be a developer.  If he keeps his land and lets it return to its natural state, he goes bankrupt.

“Are you suggesting that we subsidize the farm because we think that the only alternative is development?“

Yes, indeed I am. Farms are of course already subsidized—though far too much of the federal subsidizes go to big agri-business rather than good small farming businesses.  Land-use taxes are also subsidy. I think we should continue on doing what we need to preserve open land and sound farming that produces tasty local food. Tax credits for easements. Incentives for the installation of non-polluting equipment and procedures, etc. The only people who have a beef with that are real-estate developers. Though of course they’ll try crooked things to manipulate taxes and easements for their own benefit, which then discredits legitimate family farmers who are trying to preserver Virginia’s rural heritage.

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

  • Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
  • Respect others.
  • Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
  • See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Click here to post a comment.

 

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Videos
Weekend
 

Advertisement