Comments on: Opposition forms to Blacksburg housing proposal

By: Hokies416

Hokies416 — Sat, 19 May 2012 02:32:26 +0000

Local_Hokie: Have you researched Landmark’s proposed site plan? Those cute little cottages shown in the photos are not the only thing they are planning on putting there. Does a 24 bedroom ‘cottage’ look any better than the traditional bunkers? Not much and they are proposing them on this site. Check out their site and look for the ‘Lumpkin’. Trust me, it looks as bad as it sounds. Also try the ‘Sycamore’, the ‘Cloverhurst’ and the ‘Boulevard’. These are not ‘cottages’ to any stretch of the imagination.
I’d much rather see the single family homes that the comp plan allows than any student housing at all. I will concede that when they do it right, they can have a nice looking product, but not 192 on this site, it is just not the place and what they market to hook you is not what you get. The old bait and switch. The site plan they are proposing will look nothing like Echol’s Village. They have developed sites with all cottages, but that is not what they are proposing here. Nice try, but take a second look at that site plan.

By: Amy

Amy — Fri, 18 May 2012 22:32:27 +0000

@Local_Hokie– yes, their pictures make it look like a quaint little development, but that is misleading. Scroll down on their architecture elevations (http://www.landmark-properties.com/retreatblacksburgfacts/docs/LandmarkProperites_architecture_booklet_JD-4.pdf) and you’ll see that most of their units are actually large, 3-story structures with 20-24 bedrooms. For instance, they do things like put 2 5-bedroom units on the bottom floor and then stack 2 4-bedroom townhouses on top of them. So you end up with a pretty large building that I don’t think most people would ever dream of calling a ‘cottage’. Another thing to remember is that all 20 of the students renting bedrooms in each one of these buildings will be parking outside, so imagine a sea of cars (800 or more), and it doesn’t look so cute anymore. Unfortunately I don’t think the pictures they like to show are representative of what they actually plan to build. The site plan shows numerous large structures if you look closely, you can check it yourself.

By: Local_Hokie

Local_Hokie — Fri, 18 May 2012 06:47:48 +0000

Has anyone researched Landmark’s portfolio? Their sites are actually quite beautiful compared to the traditional three floor military bunkers that developer’s call “The Village” and “Terrace View.” If you haven’t, please check out http://www.landmarkathens.com/communities/the_retreat/photos.php

I would much rather have this development as student housing than another Collegiate Suites like structure… and from looking at it, seems to be very similar to Echol’s Village down Givens Lane in Blacksburg.

By: Lisa Ress

Lisa Ress — Tue, 15 May 2012 01:08:37 +0000

The 780-plus bedrooms Landmark proposes to build will bring severe traffic problems to Glade Road, a road already hazardous due to University City Mall, Kroger, the post office, and access to the 460 bypass nearby. In addition, the additional bathrooms will further tax the already stressed Toms Creek watershed. Finally, the plan proposed is in violation of Blacksburg’s perfectly reasonable and necessary Comprehensive Plan. Although I do not live near the proposed development, I do not want to see the character of that neighborhood further degraded.

By: Kacie Hodges

Kacie Hodges — Mon, 14 May 2012 23:53:16 +0000

to NRJMike: to follow up on your comment ‘If you check the VT strategic plan, you will find that growth in student population, especially in graduate students, is beyond the numbers cited here’. You are incorrect. I went to the Virginia Tech Office of Institutional Research (www.ir.vt.edu) to check the numbers myself. They have a report available on-line that they submit to the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia that reports the official projected growth, both undergrad and grad. The official projections for growth of all populations will not increase more than 700 students all the way through the year 2018, yet the developer wants you to believe that there will be an increase of 370 students per year. This number is not based on any facts. Granted, the charts can be difficult to interpret, so to be sure I was reading all the charts correctly I even met with the assistant provost, who was very available and helpful. Bottom line is, the developer did not do their homework. The IR webpage lists the links for past enrollment and projected enrollment together, however since the numbers did not support what the developer wanted, they either didn’t look or chose to ignore it. The numbers are out there and not hard to find. Instead, the developer used the historic surge in enrollment from April 16th to make up a projected number that did suit their needs. Just one small example of the way they do business.

By: Arlene

Arlene — Mon, 14 May 2012 22:48:49 +0000

The Comprehensive Plan was written to protect the town from excessive construction in this beautiful area. Glade Heights is a wonderful investment that needs a buyer with the vision and ability to build according to the original plan and current zoning.
Glade Heights, LLC should continue its search for such a buyer.

By: Mary Ann Bonadeo

Mary Ann Bonadeo — Mon, 14 May 2012 18:00:49 +0000

Mr. fact checker, If you think this potential development is so great for the Town, why aren’t you willing to use your real name here? And please check your facts to explain how a student housing development that just moves an existing student population from one location to another will create more jobs and revenue. I agree fully that the existing codes for zoning and development design standards should be enforced, which means that we should not allow the subject property to be reclassified in the Comprehensive Plan and rezoned for a high-density student housing development that is completely inappropriate on this environmentally sensitive site in the middle of several single-family neighborhoods with much lower density. I would be happy to support a single-family development there that is consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods. I would also be happy to support Landmark’s development on another site that is already appropriately zoned and supported by the Comprehensive Plan. Why should the Town of Blacksburg even bother writing a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance if we’re going to ignore them just because some out-of-town developer starts throwing money around?

By: Kim

Kim — Mon, 14 May 2012 17:35:29 +0000

@fact checker: Yes, there are family homes surrounding this property. Nobody objects to building family homes on this site, that is what the land owners originally proposed, that is what the comp plan supports, that is what current zoning supports. A neighborhood of family homes would meet all requirements and satisfy the town’s housing needs and also produce economic benefits. 784 student rental bedrooms with 850 cars (on a slow day) do not constitue a family neighborhood and would be drastically different than what the town has planned for on the site. No need to get condescending just because people have valid concerns and arguments about this proposal.

By: fact checker checker

fact checker checker — Mon, 14 May 2012 17:35:19 +0000

It is interesting that fact checker seems to think that all those opposed to this development are against all development. I believe that the consistent view–from what I’ve read–is that is should be developed in accordance with current zoning and the surrounding density. The fact is when you actually look at the surrounding densities, there are 2 dwelling units per acre in the Village at Tom’s Creek, ~1.6 DU/Acre to the west, and ~1.5 DU/Acre to the south. The current future land use density for the parcel is 1.5 DU/Acre. So now that everything has been developed around this parcel to a density of 2 DU/Acre–or less–why should the Town come in at the last minute and with the final piece of the jigsaw puzzle–in this area of the Town–RAM a density of 4 DU/Acre onto this site? Especially a development which, based on the quotes from VT, doesn’t seem like something that is really needed since there doesn’t appear to be a shortage of student housing.

By: NRJMike

NRJMike — Mon, 14 May 2012 17:11:41 +0000

Stan, planning documents are plans, not laws. The special permitting and rezoning processes are used to make changes to the plans if the Council thinks it’s in the best interests of the town (or county, or city, as the case may be). That’s because things change, and you need a method to adjust the plans sometimes. If you check the VT strategic plan, you will find that growth in student population, especially in graduate students, is beyond the numbers cited here, Jeff’s research notwithstanding. That certainly doesn’t mean this proposed project is necessary. But not to fear – given Council’s recent tradition of bowing to the wishes of small, vocal groups, there is no way the project will be approved.