A former member of the Stafford County Board of Supervisors is trying to stall a vote on a redevelopment project to remake the county’s historic courthouse area.
Cord Sterling, who represented the Rock Hill District until he stepped down six years ago, sued the Board of Supervisors, asking a judge for an injunction to delay a vote set for Tuesday, July 6, on the Fountain Park project. The development would sit on six acres of privately-owned land, just across the county courthouse, with four buildings, 94 apartments, and street-level commercial space.
The land needs to be rezoned from B-2 urban commercial to a higher classification, known as UD-5 zoning, which allows for more densely packed development. A county staff report, which, in part reads like a brochure for a timeshare, states, “Fountain Park will fit in with the Downtown Stafford, which, as proposed, will feature state-of-the-art amenities with a hometown feel, providing urban life at its best.”
Fountain Park would be developed in concert with the adjacent “Downtown Stafford” project, to be built on 23-acres of county-owned land, which was approved last month.
Sterling’s lawsuit petitions the court to delay the Board of Supervisors vote 180 days, which would give the public to review the proposed development., the lawsuit claims.
The suit comes after Sterling filed a records order through the Freedom of Information Act on June 21, requesting emails created by county staff and elected officials discussing the project. The county failed to respond to his request within the mandatory five-day time frame.
County Administrator Fred Pressley said Sterling’s records order, sent via email, landed in a spam folder, according to emails obtained by Potomac Local News. “To our knowledge, this is the first FOIA request that was screened to a spam holding area,” a county spokesman told Potomac Local News.
The county is working to provide a response to Sterling by tomorrow, he adds. Two other records orders filed by Sterling, filed in April and May, were delivered on time, the county adds.
Not ready for prime time
Throughout the conceptual development phase of the Foutain Park and Downtown Stafford projects, many residents have not only spoken against the idea. They’ve cited concerns of growing traffic congestion and more strain on county government resources and public schools.
Many have said they don’t understand why the county would pursue the development while two other prominent, long-talked-about developments in North Stafford, Aquia Town Center and The Garrison, remain essentially dirt fields.
Last year, the county partnered with the quasi-governmental agency, CIT, to erect new 5G cell phone towers, making the courthouse area, and subsequently Fountain Park, a testbed site for new technologies. As a recent editorial in the Fredericksburg Free-Lance Star, declaring the project isn’t ready to move forward, points out that little is known about what new technologies will be developed, other than the technologies will be able to monitor vehicles, people, and objects in the testbed, right down to trash cans.
Detractors of the project, including Sterling in his lawsuit, say “this highly unusual action will prevent the collection of proffers from the developer…,” leaving the firm that would leave the landowner, JPI, off the hook for things like roadway improvements or cash to offset in an increase in the number of students in county schools or cash to offset a needed increase in fire and rescue services. All could add up to more than $5 million, opponents say.
Additionally, they say a traffic study of the streets around the property, which a congested Route 1, has yet to begin. These types of studies are commonplace with other similar developments in the region.
It’s about a vision
Like Garrisonville District Supervisor Mark Dudenhefer, supporters of the project say Foutain Park and the adjacent “Downtown” project is about having a vision for a new-to-Stafford town center development, which are commonplace in other Northern Virginia neighborhoods. “We have to decide is that what we really want? Or are we willing to take some chances and attract the types of restaurants and retail spaces that we really want,” said Dudenehfer.
It’s also about accommodating Stafford County’s growing government. The county plans to build a long-talked-about new courthouse on some of the 23-acres county-owned land that is the Downtown Stafford project. The current courthouse, which dates back about 100 years, would be replaced.
The county administration office, located next to the existing courthouse, would also be expanded. It’s a long-overdue expansion for the second-fastest-growing jurisdiction in Virginia, supporters say.
The project’s location, between the courthouse and Stafford Hospital, on a newly built six-lane Hospital Center Boulevard with a connection to a newly reconstructed interchange at Interstate 95, will make it easy to attack both the people and businesses needed to make a Downtown Stafford viable, they say.
Transparency?
The Board of Supervisors is set to vote on the matter at 3 p.m. Tuesday, July 6, over the objections of Board Chairman Crystal Vanuch, who represents the Rock Hill District, and Meg Bohmke, of Falmouth. Both have been met with resistance from their fellow Board members when they asked to take up the discussion at the Board’s 7 p.m. session on Tuesday to provide the opportunity for more residents to attend the meeting.
“I have personally received a lot of calls of concern about this being such a controversial topic and it being the 3 p.m. meeting. Whether we agree or not, the perception to the public is that we are doing this at 3 p.m. to minimize visibility…I am having trouble with why anyone would not want more transparency and ability for the public to attend/watch/comment on one of the biggest decisions this Board has made…,” writes Vanuch, in an email obtained by Potomac Local News.
Dudenhefer argues that the time for public comment is over and that all of the pertinent project documents, albeit difficult to understand, have been posted online for months. Discussion about this project has been going on since 2017, he adds.
“Stop with the BS transparency stuff. The majority of the Board voted and reaffirmed that decision. The chair doesn’t have the authority to override the majority [of the Board of Supervisors,” penned Dudenhefer in an email response to Vanuch. “I will be my paycheck that if you were on the other side of this issue, you’d take a different position.”
