Chesterfield continues to grow at an alarming rate
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dear Editor,

There is an explosive rate of growth in the county. More and more houses and subdivisions are planned and being built. Route 10 is seeing such growth, it will only be a few years until Route 10 is completely built up from Hopewell to Richmond. There are plans for at least two or more new shopping centers. Does Chesterfield really need another shopping center with yet another big box Mart store? I think not.

With all this growth and building going on, animal habitats are being destroyed, and the animals are having to go further and further to find food. There have even been incidents of large wild animals showing up in residential areas. Also, trees are being ripped out at an alarming rate. Trees are a valuable part of our environment. I know of several areas in the county that just a few years ago had lots of trees. Now those areas are virtually devoid of trees due to the building of houses and shopping centers.

In the future, will we have to take children to animal and tree museums in order for them to see the animals and trees that once were a part of the county? It seems as if it will be so. And if it is it will be a very sad commentary of our modern ways.

When is enough going to be enough? Will it be when every piece of land in the county is filled with subdivisions, shopping centers and strip malls with the usual businesses in them? In my opinion those things are plenty now, and we do not need more.

Mark Edwards

Chesterfield

Roseland responds to previous letter

 

Dear Editor,

In response to Mr. Stroud's letter [to the editor, Sept. 24], we appreciate his interest in wanting Roseland to be all it can be. His letter shared concern over other Traditional Neighborhood Developments (TNDs) that I have referenced during zoning because they received low scores by an online reviewer of TNDs around the country.

The Neo-Traditional Community Review, from which Mr. Stroud takes his numbers, grades communities based on elements like affordability, density (the higher the better), the job/housing balance, and mass transit, some of which don't exist in the places reviewed.

Affordability is difficult to achieve in many TNDs because the high demand causes home values to increase faster than in conventional developments. In many small TNDs, the only real employment opportunities are retail positions. In Roseland, we are providing hundreds of thousands of square feet of office space that will appeal to businesses currently in Innsbrook or downtown.

Mass transit is often not an option in many suburban developments around the country. We are pleased that we have planned for a future mass transit district in Roseland and think that all developments should address alternative forms of transportation in the future.

A closer look at the Web site where Mr. Stroud gains his information reveals that no community received a passing score, including Celebration in Florida and Orenco Station in Oregon. Instead of Googling a Web site and using its content as a sole basis for concern, we recommend that doubters visit these communities, walk through them and talk to residents and businesses, as we have, and then decide whether these places are worthy of praise. We think they are.

It is notable that of the simple scoring system that the Web site uses, there is no value given to developments that provide environmental leadership or energy efficiency in their communities. We're doing that, whether or not it affects our "grade."

In past commentary, Mr. Stroud has compared Roseland to "The Truman Show," at the same time expressing doubt that the suburbs can be improved to reduce auto reliance. Rest assured, we aren't looking for Utopia. What we are working to deliver is a long-term viable solution for living and working in Chesterfield County - one that answers the questions of how we will live in a world of $10-a-gallon gas, complex environmental standards and how we respond to our aging population and their changing economic and lifestyle expectations. We are proud of our goals for Roseland, and though it may not be everyone's choice, at least there will now be a sustainable choice where none previously existed.

Dave Anderson, PE Roseland Development Co.

More on CCPS goals

 

Dear Editor,

I have read the letters of Courtney Ryan [Aug. 27 and Sept. 17], Georgianne Ginder [Sept. 17], and the response of Tim Bullis [the school system's director of community relations, Aug. 17] regarding the goals of CCPS (Chesterfield County Public Schools). As a retired businessman and former owner of my own businesses, I appreciate, understand and wholly support Ryan's comments on the school board's lack of establishing meaningful goals.

If a business's board of directors used the same approach as the school board, businesses would accomplish very little, and what they did accomplish would be inconsistent, and success would be purely coincidental rather than by design.

For my tax dollars, CCPS needs more people like Ryan on the board and in administration positions if CCPS actually intends on becoming a world-class educational enterprise.

W. Ambrose Rindahl

Chesterfield

Letters to the editor can be e-mailed to letters@chesterfieldobserver.com, mailed to P.O. Box 1616, Midlothian, VA 23113, or faxed to 744-3269. Letters should include the writer's phone number and home address, but neither will be printed. All letters may be edited for clarity or space. For complete guidelines, visit www.chesterfieldobserver. com and click on "letters policy."