13 thoughts on “Loach Running for Supervisor”

  1. Hmmm… Tom Loach (anti-growth) Ann Mallek (anti-growth) = David Wyant (re-elected).

    Can somebody please tell me how this can be wrong?

  2. No offense Harry, but I worked on the Crozet Master Plan which quadrupled the size of Crozet taking the community from 3,000 to 12,000 residents. Is that anti-growth? Then again, I don’t want to see Crozet go to the 24,000 population Mr.Wyant does and I suppose you could call this anti-growth.


  3. Tom,

    Thanks for the clarification. No offense taken – I asked for correction and am pleased that you provided it.

    I know that David Wyant is consistently pro-growth, so I suppose the challenge for those of us who are anti-growth is to determine who’s likley to be a more dependable vote against development in Albemarle – Tom Loach or Ann Mallek. I look forward to an enlightening campaign.

    That said, I do wonder whether the presence of three candidates on the ballot is more likely to give the election to David Wyant, though.

  4. Harry,
    Thanks for your comment. I don’t see myself as antigrowth, in fact I believe that all the growth areas have to be master planned and should be done so in coordination. What I would change is I would do a first run through of each growth area to see what 1. the potential population could be. (by the way much of this work has already by done by the original consulants) 2. What infrastructure will be needed to support that population and 3. An estimate of what that infrastructure will cost. The residents of the county certainly have a right to see just what they face in the future and decide if that’s what they want and can afford. I’m sure when the growth areas were originally drawn up there was not very much science that went into their design. For instance, in Crozet we moved borders and land as part of our Master Plan, because it made more sense to do so. It’s my view that growth area residents North, South, East and West are feeling the pressures of growth as never before and those feeling will play a significant role in this years election.
    One more thing. If you take a look at the past agendas for the board of supervisors you’ll see that much of their business deals with land use issues. If you look at those land use issues, you’ll see the majority deal with growth area issues, so I don’t think it should be suprising to see someone from Crozet, the only growth area in the White Hall district interesting running for office.


  5. Tom, you and Ann should get together and decide who bows out. You are going to split the anti-Wyant vote.

  6. Agreed. At least until we come to our senses an enact instant run-off voting.

  7. Your comments assume there is wide support for Mr. Wyant. Mr. Wyant and for that matter Mr. Boyd and Mr. Dorrier could have claimed a major victory during their term with the successful implementation of the Crozet Master Plan. The Crozet plan was the first and if handled in a competent manner could have set the gold standard for the plans to follow. Instead they ignored almost two years of work done by the entire community not once but multiple times including ignoring a petition of over 1000 signatures. At present they have taken a position that Crozet can grow to over 24,000 residents, about one half the size of the City of Charlottesville, without providing and evidence how they arrived at that conclusion. This is not to mention insulting our intelligence with their repeated accusations that the entire issue was a miscommunication. As supervisor I plan to hold the County to the Master Plan as developed by the community and preserve Crozet as a small town in rural Albemarle.

    With regard to my running for supervisor, I can only point out that a sufficient amount of business done by the board of supervisors deals with land use issues and the majority of those issues deal with our growth areas. Of the current 6 supervisors 5 are from the rural areas of the County, yet over 50% of the population resides in our growth areas. Crozet is the growth area for the White Hall district. As supervisor I will not only live with my decisions, but in them. I have been involved with community issues since I first move there almost 17 years ago. I was President of the Crozet Community Association and was part of the Master Planning steering committee.

    Hope that clarifies my position.


  8. I’m curious how someone can say, “I don’t see myself as antigrowth,” and at the same time serve as a board member for an organization whose “core beliefs” include the following (from the ASAP website):

    “Smart Growth” is Not Enough
    We support the growth-management methods promoted by advocates of “smart growth.” These buy time, but ultimately the “smart growth” approach is little more than an accommodation to growth-trying to reduce or postpone its costs by determining where and how growth occurs, not whether it occurs. Slowing local population growth is necessary, but not sufficient. Ultimately, growth must stop.

  9. Falstaff,

    I’m sure Tom Loach is capable of responding himself, but I see no contradiction. ASAP has not, to my knowledge, said at what level growth should stop. They’ve said that “ultimately, growth must stop”. That point could be at 10% greater population that currently exists and could be accomplished by zoning controls. Or, that point could be at 1000% greater population and be accomplished because quality of life has become so degraded that nobody wants to live here.

    The question is, at what point growth will stop and by what means will it occur? The people who live in a place can determine what that place will look like by conscious design or they can watch the market forces do their work.

  10. Well put Harry and thank you for your comment. As Harry already pointed out that as we sit here today there is alreay a maximum population limit imposed by the current zoing law. The question ASAP is asking is do we want to reach that limit? I want to see growth stopped in Crozet at the 12,000 not 24,000 number, because I believe the 24,000 number would so radically change the character of the town as to make it unacceptable to residents both old and new. That said, is a 400% increase in population anti-growth? I would also mention the 12,000 number came not from the community selecting that population number, but was given to us by the county as the Ideal Max Population based on a consulting report. If it could be proved to me and the majority of the community that this population could be exceeded without harm to Crozet ceratinly that should be considered, but right now my view is one used in medicine “first do no harm”.
    I do believe there is a point of diminishing returns with it comes to growth and at a certain point growth will start to lower the quality of life. Certainly this is what happened on Long Island where I came from. It is well to remember that ASAP talks about sustainable population, which too many people think means static population. That is to say if a population limit were imposed that all migration in and out of the county would suddenly halt. One usually hears this when someone tells me that if a population limit was set there would be no room for our children. I know that kind of response is simple and uninformed, but I can guarantee it will be repeated by someone before the campaign is over.


  11. One usually hears this when someone tells me that if a population limit was set there would be no room for our children. I know that kind of response is simple and uninformed, but I can guarantee it will be repeated by someone before the campaign is over.

    To intercept the inevitable question, the reason that this is wrong is that American reproductive rates are stable. The only reason that our collective population grows is because of immigration. The same is true for the Charlottesville/Albemarle population, which is very much in stage four of the demographic transition. (It wouldn’t surprise me if the area moved into stage five — birth rates below replacement rate — in the next couple of decades.) The children of those who live here (ie, me) marry the children of others who live here (ie, my wife) do not result in population increases.

Comments are closed.