House Counties, Cities and Towns Subcommittee
Number 2 tabled the 2006 anti-growth/anti-housing package of
legislation, including House Bill 1610, Governor Tim Kaine's
APF Road Authority bill, introduced to the 2006 Session of the
Virginia General Assembly on Wednesday morning, February
While there is not an official record of the
action of the CC&T Subcommittee, numerous observers,
including HBAV, informally recorded the vote to be 9 to 2. The
motion to table HB 1610 and the remainder of the anti-growth
package, effectively kills those measures for the 2006 Session
of the State Legislature.
Those anti-growth/anti-housing measures
"Killed" by the CC&T Subcommittee last Wednesday morning
are the following:
House Bill 820, Delegate May - Would have
expanded the existing road impact fee provisions to include
school improvements and extend the applicability of such
provisions from Northern Virginia localities to all
House Bill 1193, by Delegate Bob Marshall -
Would have granted impact fee authority to localities with
designated Chesapeake Bay Preservation areas. The authority
includes impact fees for roads, schools and public safety.
House Bill 1195, By Delegate Bob Marshall
- Would have required the Commonwealth Transportation Board to
establish and apply an impact fee in any locality or region
where pursuant to a comprehensive review, it determines that
transportation needs are not being adequately met.
House Bill 1196, by Delegate Bob Marshall
- Would have allowed localities to adopt provisions for the
assessment of impact fees prior to issuance of a building
permit. The impact fees may be assessed in relation to the
adequacy of education, transportation, parks, or public safety
House Bill 1197, by Delegate Bob Marshall
- Would have allowed localities with a population of at least
80,000 and localities that have had an annual growth rate of
at least one and one-quarter percent over the previous three
years to adopt ordinances for the assessment of impact fees
when certain public facilities are inadequate to support a
proposed residential development.
House Bill 1318, by Delegate Wittman -
Would have permitted localities to adopt reasonable
provisions allowing the locality to deny or delay subdivision
approval or issuance of a building permit or deny a rezoning
request if the locality demonstrates that public facilities
related to the provision of water are inadequate to support
the services that will be required by a proposed subdivision
or zoning classification.
House Bill 1422, by Delegate Wittman -
Would have provided that a locality that has established a
purchase of development rights program may include in its
zoning ordinance provisions for the voluntary proffering in
writing, by the owner, of reasonable conditions, which shall
include the payment of cash to the locality for local purchase
of development rights that will be dedicated as easements for
conservation, open space, or other purposes pursuant to the
Open-Space Land Act.
House Bill 1610, by Delegate Bob Marshall
and Governor Kaine - Would have allowed a locality to
deny or modify a request for rezoning when the existing and
future transportation network, which will serve the proposed
development, is inadequate to handle the anticipated
transportation impact of the proposed development.
The mother ship of the 2006 anti-growth
package was HB 1610, by Delegate Marshall, which had the
strong backing of Governor Kaine and was a late centerpiece of
his campaign for governor.
HBAV opposed House Bill 1610 for very good
reason. The concept of requiring public roads and other public
facilities (public schools, fire and rescue, public libraries,
public water and sewer, etc.) to be in place prior to
residential or commercial development is a flawed concept.
It's biggest fallacy it that it completely ignores the reality
of growth and development. In the natural order of
development, the construction of public roads follows
residential and commercial growth. Localities neither have the
vision nor the resources to build roads to nowhere, which APF
growth management authority would require.
House Bill 1610 or APF for roads is not a new
or innovative approach to planning. The planning concept has
been applied in various areas of the nation, and in almost
every case the following consequences have developed:
The cost of new and existing housing has
increased dramatically because the supply of new housing has
not kept pace with population growth or the demand for
Sprawl has increased as those working at new
jobs in the popular suburbs (where most of the new jobs are
being created in Virginia) must seek more affordable housing
long distances from their job center; and
The quality of life of area residents has
declined as fathers and mothers spend many minutes or many
hours commuting to and from work each day.
HBAV-sponsored Housing Blitz's on the General
Assembly Building (GAB) on January 17th and
February 7th to reinforce the home building
industry's opposition to HB 1610. Over 100 HBAV members
attended the January 17th "Blitz" and nearly 50
HBAV members attended the February 7th "Blitz".
Homebuilders and HBAV Associate members marched to the GAB and
personally urged their House Delegates and State Senators to
oppose HB 1610 and the other pieces of the anti-growth
The Richmond-based HBAV lobbying team greatly appreciates
such grassroots membership support. It made the difference in
this battle and will help keep safe, decent and affordable
housing a dream for thousands of Virginians.