“Our town and county experts work for the citizens” – Vice Mayor Bertaut

By Valerie Cury

Work has begun on the Valley Springs II subdivision, which is inside the county and zoned as Joint Land Management Areas 2 and 3 (JLMA-2 and JLMA-3). The builder plans to construct 26 homes on 67.165 acres. The development is south of A Street and next to the Valley Springs I subdivision, which is in the Town of Purcellville. The entrance to Valley Springs II will be Springbury Drive, located on A Street across from Blue Ridge Middle School.

The front portion of the development, which is JLMA-2, will have 5 homes on smaller lots, with the rest of the homes scattered throughout the 67-acre property –including 5 open space parcels.

The construction entrance to this development has raised concern over the years because it was planned to go through Valley Springs Drive. As this is the main road in and out of the Valley Springs I neighborhood, this has greatly worried the 39-home subdivision due to the safety of the residents and children.

In an email sent to the town council and read at the July 25 Purcellville Town Council Work Session, Valley Springs I resident and Home Owners Association Board Member Paul Orentas wrote, “Over the past few years as plans were being developed and approved by the County [for Valley Springs II], we voiced numerous concerns with the builder/developer regarding the location of the construction traffic entrance for the new subdivision.”

Orentas said that the developer assured the HOA “that the construction entrance would be located on a newly constructed egress off A Street [Springbury Drive] just east of Blue Ridge Middle School.”

“We have learned that the Town approved the use of Valley Springs Drive as the main egress into the new site for construction traffic. However, I do not believe enough consideration was given to the impact of this decision on the existing 39 homes in Valley Springs [I] and the resulting hazardous conditions on the Valley Springs Drive when school is in session.”

He explained that when school is in session, children walk along Crosman Court and must cross Valley Springs Drive to get to the bus stop. “Note there is no four-way stop in this intersection and Valley Springs Drive is provided the right of way.”

Orentas said the increased construction traffic during the day will “create a hazardous situation for the bus drivers and the children.” He also said the community wants to avoid having the construction entrance turn into the permanent entrance into Valley Springs II.

Regarding the issue of the construction entrance going through Valley Springs Drive, Council Member Boo Bennett said, “We need to reverse that. [The fact] that the county would perpetuate that kind of traffic on their own citizens and then someone in this town approved that, makes me sick.

“I really find that awful. These are the people who pay salaries here, and at the county level … and they [the residents] tried to do the right thing to work with the county and the developer; and they are put last. I really do not appreciate that.”

Concerning instances where the administrative staff has not been communicating with the town council on projects, Vice Mayor Chris Bertaut said that both the town and the county have their own comprehensive and transportation plans. 

Bertaut explained that in the county plan, there’s a “strategy outline for Purcellville and it’s to support the Town of Purcellville efforts to support growth within the existing town limits – that will not compromise its small-town charm.”

He said the County Comprehensive Plan “outlines the shared as well as the distinct responsibilities of both the county and the town. There is quite a bit of language that says the county must work with the town to achieve these goals and visions.

“That means the county and town employees must work together with the knowledge and consent of their elected officials,” the vice mayor said. 

“The so-called experts must be directed by citizens through their elected representatives, or the needs and desires of the citizens will be ignored for the sake of other interests.”

“Our town and county experts work for the citizens at the direction of elected officials who represent them – any other arrangement is unacceptable.”

Bertaut continued, “In the [County] Comprehensive Plan, the town and county must be consulted regarding development in both the JLMAs to the north and south of town and the areas to the east and west – which are adjacent to the county’s Rural Policy Areas.

“Uses inconsistent with either uses described for the JLMAs and the Rural Policy Area are strongly discouraged within the Comprehensive Plan.

“If you’ve heard that the town has no say in what goes on in the JLMAs, you are being misled,” said Bertaut. “They are called Joint Land Management Areas for a reason and that reason is that decisions about what goes on in those areas are supposed to be made jointly by the town and the county through their elected leadership.”

He said the strategy statement in the [County] Comprehensive Plan is to “encourage new commercial uses to locate in the Town of Purcellville before locating in the JLMA – which includes the Kuhn property on Purcellville Road across from the Mayfair community.”

Bertaut also said the town sent a letter to the county asking them to remove the Northern Collector Road from their County Wide Transportation Plan.

“This NCR, if built, would transform Mayfair Crown Drive from a rural road solely serving the residents of Mayfair into a thoroughfare that would endanger town residents for the convenience of through traffic.

“This town council is committed to preventing the extension of Mayfair Crown Drive through to Fields Farm Road and onward to 690. There are other ways to build a second entrance and exit that doesn’t involve creating additional risk for the local residents.”

The extension of Mayfair Crown Drive has been supported throughout the process directly then indirectly by Council Member Erin Rayner and candidate for town council Caleb Stought – both residents of Mayfair.