There were two awkward moments, but they weren’t as cringy as one might have expected.
They came Tuesday night when the developer of a controversial proposed campground in White Oak came face to face with vocal opponents of the project, politely saying hello and then, later, goodbye, outside of a Stafford County Board of Supervisors meeting.
The supervisors agreed, 5-1, to approve changes to county regulations for campgrounds, which include requiring a conditional-use permit for the businesses on agriculturally zoned land. Campgrounds were previously a “by-right” use, which means they could be developed without approval from the supervisors.
After the vote and outside the meeting, members of the Kanazawa family, which lives on property that would be surrounded by the Crow’s Nest Outdoor Adventure campground, said they thought that the supervisors’ move just simplified the rules for such operations.
But while they were being interviewed by the Free Press, Mark McLeod, developer of the campground proposed for a 75-acre parcel off Belle Plains Road, walked by, and the two parties said hello.
A few minutes later, when McLeod was discussing a lawsuit that he and his wife have filed against the county, the Kanazawas again crossed paths with the developer, and everyone calmly bid one another good night.
The good manners belied what has been more than a yearlong fight over the campground. McLeod has portrayed his project as one that will allow a variety of people to experience the beauty of southern Stafford, while opponents have brought up concerns about issues including traffic and possible damage to the local environment, specifically, wetlands.
Because McLeod applied for construction with the county under the old regulations, he didn’t need the supervisors’ OK to build. But county staff told him that he could have only tents — not recreational vehicles or travel trailer — which McLeod said wasn’t correct according to the rules that were on the books.
So he filed suit against Stafford. A hearing was held in the case last month, but a trial hadn’t been scheduled as of Tuesday night.
Meanwhile, the supervisors initiated the process of changing the campground regulations.
There was a question about whether the Crow’s Nest campground would be grandfathered if the regulations were amended because it was planned before the new rules, but county staff told the supervisors Tuesday that no applications were pending.
That, presumably, was because McLeod’s application for approval of a site plan for the project expired while the situation played out.
Nonetheless, he spoke at a public hearing before the supervisors’ vote. He said that, 10 years ago, a previous Board of Supervisors “recognized the importance of outdoor recreation and intentionally broadened the definition of a campground.”
Those supervisors made it clear that by-right campgrounds could include, but not be limited to, travel trailers, cabins, pop-up campers, and tent camping, McLeod said. RV/travel trailer parks intended for long-term living required a conditional-use permit, but campgrounds with temporary stays were by-right.
But everything seemed to change when he submitted the Crow’s Nest application, he said.
“Changing the rules mid-process isn’t just unfair, it sets a dangerous precedent for anyone trying to work with the county in good faith,” he said. “Landowners, small business owners and families trying to invest in this county should be able to trust the process. The rules should not change simply because someone uses them.”
Also during the public hearing, Joni Kanazawa said any claim McLeod may make about having spent a lot of money on his project should be considered a result of his refusing to answer the county’s questions for almost 15 months.
“The delay in application approval has been primarily caused by the developer’s unwillingness to answer the county’s repeated questions about what type of a vehicle or structure would be utilized at each campsite,” she said.
A few minutes later, the supervisors approved the zoning changes with little discussion. Rock Hill District Supervisor Crystal Vanuch was absent from the meeting.
Speed and red-light cameras
In other business Tuesday, the supervisors voted 6-0 to institute a photo-red and speed camera program in Stafford.
The move would allow the county government to place cameras around the locality to catch those who speed through school zones and run stoplights.
Violators caught going 10 mph or more over the speed limit in school zones would be issued a civil penalty of $100 but wouldn’t accumulate Department of Motor Vehicles points or impact their car insurance. Red-light runners would be issued a civil fine of $50.
But Stafford County Sheriff’s Maj. R. Jason Dembowski told the supervisors that no one should consider the program as being instituted as a moneymaker.
“The purpose of why we’re doing this is to enhance the safety,” he said. “That is the primary focus. We do not have enough deputies to be able to run radar in every school, every day, every week.”
Dembowski said the Sheriff’s Office conducted a study at six schools — Stafford Elementary; Drew and Stafford middle schools; and Colonial Forge, North Stafford and Brooke Point high schools — and saw significant numbers of drivers going at least 10 mph over the speed limit.
He said all violations would be reviewed by a sworn law-enforcement officer, and that the program wouldn’t be up and running for six to eight months.
Dembowski also said the Sheriff’s Office can get the program started with existing personnel, but that it would require additional staff as time goes on.
He said that, in other jurisdictions, some people are apprehensive about installing cameras but then get used to them.
“You’re seeing it become safer,” Dembowski said, “and you’re seeing people being accepting of it, especially in the school zones, because everybody wants their children to be safe.”
The supervisors approved the program with little discussion. Stafford joins Spotsylvania County and Fredericksburg in adopting school-zone enforcement.
‘Downtown Stafford’
Also Tuesday, the board voted 5-1 to rezone 24.3 acres from agricultural to urban development mixed-use village center for the Attain at Stafford mixed-use project.
The development would include up to 300 apartments and about 57,600 square feet of office and/or commercial space between U.S. 1 and Old Potomac Church Road, near Stafford Hospital.
It would include two four-story residential buildings and would feature a mix of one- and two-bedroom units. An 8,000-square-foot “clubhouse” is also proposed along with a fitness center, an outdoor swimming pool, a dog park and two pickleball courts.
The project would be similar to the Attain at Towne Centre development near Spotsylvania Towne Centre. Attain at Towne Centre is located where a Sears once stood.
Attain at Stafford is envisioned to be part of what would be a “downtown Stafford,” and the developers said they would give Stafford government employees a 3-percent discount on rent.
Hartwood District Supervisor Darrell English cast the sole vote against the project. He said that the development would create a lot of traffic, and that the projection that Attain at Stafford would generate only 48 new students at nearby schools was too low.
“I can’t support this at all,” English said. “It’s too much.”
