Do not change these buffers! I oppose the higher density. We need to preserve some open space and green space. The natural environment/natural beauty is cited as one of the valued features of crozet. Leave some natural space and protect the health of our streams and groundwater!
These buffers need not be changed. There is no reason to butt up right next to the very edge of where development is allowed. Leave some space to breathe and stop cramming every inch with a housing development.
I can't tell from the picture above what the difference is from 2010 till now, but the language above discussing adding 23-46 units (e.g., homes) is a terrible idea. I don't understand the Greenspace boundary reflection of environmental features as I can't tell what is different. I support green space but do not support more residential homes/dwellings
Do not change these buffers! I oppose the higher density. We need to preserve some open space and green space. The natural environment/natural beauty is cited as one of the valued features of crozet. Leave some natural space and protect the health of our streams and groundwater!
These buffers need not be changed. There is no reason to butt up right next to the very edge of where development is allowed. Leave some space to breathe and stop cramming every inch with a housing development.
I can't tell from the picture above what the difference is from 2010 till now, but the language above discussing adding 23-46 units (e.g., homes) is a terrible idea. I don't understand the Greenspace boundary reflection of environmental features as I can't tell what is different. I support green space but do not support more residential homes/dwellings
Do not change these buffers! I oppose the higher density. We need to preserve some open space and green space. The natural environment/natural beauty is cited as one of the valued features of crozet. Leave some natural space and protect the health of our streams and groundwater!
These buffers need not be changed. There is no reason to butt up right next to the very edge of where development is allowed. Leave some space to breathe and stop cramming every inch with a housing development.
I can't tell from the picture above what the difference is from 2010 till now, but the language above discussing adding 23-46 units (e.g., homes) is a terrible idea. I don't understand the Greenspace boundary reflection of environmental features as I can't tell what is different. I support green space but do not support more residential homes/dwellings
The draft plan includes a split land use designation for White Gate Farm (TMP 56E-2). This designation aims to continue the pattern of development currently in Wickham Pond. Changing this property's designation would support broader housing choices within Crozet and infill development that connects the Park Ridge Drive corridor to Crozet's easternmost neighborhoods. <br><br>An increase of 49-143 additional units over the 2010 Master Plan could be developed under the revised designation.
Absolutely not! These areas were designated as greenspace and should remain that way for the well-being of current residents of Crozet.
Do not change these buffers! I oppose the higher density. We need to preserve some open space and green space. The natural environment/natural beauty is cited as one of the valued features of crozet. Leave some natural space and protect the health of our streams and groundwater!
These buffers need not be changed. There is no reason to butt up right next to the very edge of where development is allowed. Leave some space to breathe and stop cramming every inch with a housing development.
I can't tell from the picture above what the difference is from 2010 till now, but the language above discussing adding 23-46 units (e.g., homes) is a terrible idea. I don't understand the Greenspace boundary reflection of environmental features as I can't tell what is different. I support green space but do not support more residential homes/dwellings
The draft plan designates parcels east of Eastern Avenue, south of Westhall Drive and north of Lickinghole Basin as Neighborhood Density Residential and Parks & Green Systems.<br><br>Development in this area has occurred at a lower density than shown in the 2010 Master Plan, and the Eastern Avenue corridor provides a boundary between areas with different development patterns. The portion of Urban Density Residential east of Eastern Avenue was changed to Neighborhood Density Residential to reflect current development and improve legibility of the land use map. The Greenspace boundary was also changed to reflect the actual location of environmental features. <br><br>An increase of 10-20 additional units over the 2010 Master Plan could be developed under the revised designation.
Absolutely not! These areas were designated as greenspace and should remain that way for the well-being of current residents of Crozet.
Do not change these buffers! I oppose the higher density. We need to preserve some open space and green space. The natural environment/natural beauty is cited as one of the valued features of crozet. Leave some natural space and protect the health of our streams and groundwater!
These buffers need not be changed. There is no reason to butt up right next to the very edge of where development is allowed. Leave some space to breathe and stop cramming every inch with a housing development.
I can't tell from the picture above what the difference is from 2010 till now, but the language above discussing adding 23-46 units (e.g., homes) is a terrible idea. I don't understand the Greenspace boundary reflection of environmental features as I can't tell what is different. I support green space but do not support more residential homes/dwellings
The draft Future Land Use Plan includes a change to TMP #56-13's Greenspace boundary to reflect the actual location of environmental features. <br><br>An increase of 23-46 additional units over the 2010 Master Plan could be developed under the revised designation.
Absolutely not! These areas were designated as greenspace and should remain that way for the well-being of current residents of Crozet.
Do not change these buffers! I oppose the higher density. We need to preserve some open space and green space. The natural environment/natural beauty is cited as one of the valued features of crozet. Leave some natural space and protect the health of our streams and groundwater!
These buffers need not be changed. There is no reason to butt up right next to the very edge of where development is allowed. Leave some space to breathe and stop cramming every inch with a housing development.
I can't tell from the picture above what the difference is from 2010 till now, but the language above discussing adding 23-46 units (e.g., homes) is a terrible idea. I don't understand the Greenspace boundary reflection of environmental features as I can't tell what is different. I support green space but do not support more residential homes/dwellings
