Phosphorous limit will be "disastrous"

Dear Editor,

Thank you for your article "Roseland's outlook not all rosy" [Sept. 19] and for shedding light on the problems associated with new ordinances intended to protect the Swift Creek Reservoir. The dangers to our local economy and for the future of responsible growth are real.

When we said that "the 0.16 standard destroys Roseland," we meant it. No development, no matter how sensitively designed, can meet such a criteria. Engineers in the business have stated as much, and even a county planning commissioner publicly stated that it can't work.

Economic development opportunities along the Route 288 corridor, including the Watkins Centre south of Route 60 and Roseland's Old Town district, will be all but gone. Building schools and widening roads in the future might require three or more times the land to achieve the new standard. Indeed, if this standard had been in place two years ago, three new county schools could not have been built.

Having spoken to well over 1,000 citizens during our years of planning Roseland, we have consistently received praise for our plans. Most notably, we have been lauded for our thoughtful approach to building in an environmentally-friendly manner.

We are the only developer in Chesterfield that has ever written into its zoning case that we will use low-impact development techniques throughout all of Roseland, drastically reducing the amount of rain that runs off sites that cause siltation and phosphorus transport to the reservoir. We will be implementing regional, neighborhood and individual building environmental plans that mitigate the impacts of development like no other project in the Richmond region has ever done.

Chesterfield's own 2006 water quality reports shows that the reservoir is healthier than it has ever been, and it begs many questions regarding forecasts of the declining health of the reservoir. We think that it is best to fully understand what the problem is before embarking on dramatic changes to local law that create a new set of problems.

We have asked Chesterfield County why it would willingly create an ordinance that would be disastrous for its own economy, and we hope to hear those answers soon. Thus far, we have received nothing that makes sense. Passage of the proposed ordinance will only increase sprawl, severely hamper economic development and generate higher costs for Chesterfield and its citizens.

We take our responsibility seriously to protect the future health of the reservoir. We hope that the county takes seriously the impact that it will inflict on itself with the passage of this ordinance before finalizing its decision. Too much is at stake to get this wrong.

Dave Anderson,

PE Roseland Development Corporation