In The News

Jefferson County Delays Water Bottling Facility After Extensive Local Pushback

WV Public Broadcasting - Nov 13, 2024

Plans for a controversial water bottling plant in the tiny Jefferson County community of Middleway have been delayed after local officials deemed them incomplete.

During a tense meeting of the Jefferson County Planning Commission Tuesday evening, dozens of residents packed into a meeting room in the basement of the Charles Town Library.

More than 50 signed up to speak against the Mountain Pure Water Bottling Facility, and tens more had to observe the meeting from a hallway due to a lack of space. No community members spoke in favor of the project.

Tuesday marked the first public forum for discussing a concept plan submitted to the commission by California-based Sidewinder Enterprises.

The company’s proposed 1-million-square-foot facility would be built atop a site formerly owned by industrial conglomerate 3M. The site is also located about a half-mile from a historic district containing 60 major buildings constructed in the late 18th or early 19th centuries.

The meeting lasted more than five hours, stretching past midnight. Outside the comment period, residents repeatedly called aloud concerns over the project’s impact on local development, traffic, historic preservation, water supply and ecology — and urged commissioners to reject it outright.

Representing the company were Vice President Mark Dyck and Principal Jason Gehart of civil engineering firm Integrity Federal Services. They argued the concept plan complies with state law.

The plan “meets all the requirements of the Jefferson County ordinances,” Dyck said. “So we believe that this is qualified and acceptable to move forward.”

Dyck said the company has also made some assurances to support the needs of the local community.

Namely, he said the company would pay to replace water wells for residents within 1,000 feet of the facility in its first two years of operation, should they have concerns about the quality of their groundwater. Plus, he said the company would place a traffic light at a nearby intersection.

Residents argued this was insufficient. Dyck said 22 households would fall within the 1,000 feet threshold, but members of the public said its impact would be felt throughout the 400-person community and beyond.

“When water levels drop critically low in Jefferson County, residents and farmers, not this California company will suffer water restrictions,” said Jefferson County resident Mary Gee.

Members of the commission expressed confusion over whether extracting water for commercial purposes was permitted under state law.

They also said the outpouring of community pushback showed Sidewinder did not provide the local community sufficient outreach or information — a sentiment affirmed by residents’ groans after Dyck erroneously referred to their community as “Middleburg.”

“If you want to be successful in Jefferson County, you have to get the people behind you,” said Commissioner J Ware. “Not the developer.”

Dyck argued the project would create jobs for the local community. He also said there is value in increasing water bottle production, referencing resident comments that the unexpected devastation of Hurricane Helene belies the importance of protecting the environment.

“It’s a little bit emotional for me, because my son was in Asheville,” Dyck said. “He would have so appreciated a bottle of water from Jefferson County.”

Residents were not notified ahead of the meeting where water for the bottling process would be sourced from. During the meeting, Dyck said it would be sourced from the local water supply, which elevated concerns from community members.

Jefferson County resident Benjamin Buckley said allowing a company to extract and profit from local groundwater was especially concerning in light of recent lawsuits against the site’s former owner, 3M.

Last year, the company was ordered to pay more than $10 billion in lawsuits tied to its role in spreading “forever chemicals” across waterways nationwide.

3M “came in here. Looks like they peed in the punch bowl,” Buckley said. “Looks like another outfit is going to come in and bottle it and sell it.”

Buckley was one of numerous residents who expressed concern over the toll of new factories and business developments on West Virginia’s Eastern Panhandle, the fastest growing region of the state.

The politics and geography of Jefferson County are key to Middleway’s selection for the water bottling plant, according to the project’s webpage.

Reasons for selecting Middleway include “West Virginia’s regulatory environment” and the area’s proximity to population centers in the northeast and southern United States, the website reads.

Other commenters likened the Sidewinder project to Rockwool, a Danish steel wool manufacturer that received overwhelming local pushback over environmental worries. The facility was placed under investigation in 2020, in part due to air and water quality concerns.

“This is Rockwool all over again, where government officials know what’s happening, and they don’t tell the public until it’s too late,” said Shepherdstown resident Billie Garde. “We’re tired of being run over.”

Despite the extent of community concern, commissioners said they were limited in their authority to reject the project. They said their role is to interpret whether the project is complete and adheres to state and county policies, not whether it is suitable for the local community.

But the submitted concept plan only included reference to the factory site, whereas Dyck said the project would pull water from a separate parcel of land. Two test wells for the project have already been drilled on a separate property near Lake Louise.

Commissioner Cara Keys said omitting additional parcels from the concept plan was inadequate, because it was an integral component of the factory. 

“You can’t have a bathtub without a waterline,” she said.

Legal counsel argued that rejecting the project due to local concerns fell outside the purview of the commission, and could require court intervention. But the commissioners felt Sidewinder’s omission of additional parcels was still relevant.

They voted unanimously that the concept plan was incomplete, sending it back to the company for modification and resubmission.

Meanwhile, the concept plan marks just an early stage of the planning process. The company could be required to make additional modifications to adhere to state and local standards if its project progresses.

After the meeting, Dyck told West Virginia Public Broadcasting that the team plans to resubmit the plan with additional properties listed.

“We met all the other requirements,” he said. “I think the Planning Commission is obligated to follow the rules and regulations.”

Sidewinder’s ability to resubmit means that, for now, the commission’s decision only delayed its planning process.

But community members who spent hours waiting to hear the commission’s decision viewed it as a win, made clear by their cheers after the commission voted to send Sidewinder back to the drawing board.

Greenbrier Commission approves Optimum franchise renewal, considers updates to zoning ordinance

Therealwv.com - Oct 24, 2024 - Autumn Shelton

LEWISBURG, W.Va. – Altice USA (DBA Optimum) may receive a five-to-10-year extension of their cable franchise in Greenbrier County, now that members of the County Commission have approved the company’s franchise renewal request. 

During Wednesday’s Regular Meeting of the Greenbrier County Commission, commissioners approved Cebridge Acquisition, LLC/Altice USA’s (Optimum) franchise renewal application, which allows the company to maintain and operate its cable system throughout the county on public rights-of-way. 

According to Commission President Tammy Tincher, a public hearing was held prior to the meeting regarding the franchise renewal. Only one person representing Optimum (Cebridge Acquisition, LLC/Altice USA) was present. 

Before the franchise renewal application can be finalized, it must undergo legal review and is subject to final negotiations. 

In other Commission business: 

• Commissioners approved a FY 2025-2026 Records Management & Preservation Board grant application for a total of $5,669. If the grant is received, it would be used to purchase additional file cabinets to house fiduciary paperwork. The grant is offered every year through the WV Division of Culture and History. 
• Commissioners recommended Sarah Woody, from the Greenbrier County Health Department, for appointment on the Greenbrier County Solid Waste Authority. This appointment would fill Mike Eltzroth’s seat. 

“We thank Mr. Eltzroth for his commitment to the Solid Waste Authority,” Tincher said. “He has served a significant amount of time, and we recognize and appreciate that.”

• Commissioners approved three separations of employment (Audrianna Mace, Monica Jones, Ariel Ellis) from the Greenbrier County 911 center. 
• The BHM CPA Group was awarded a contract to conduct a single audit for 2023-2024. “We are required to go through a single audit every year at this point because we do receive over $750,000 from the federal government,” Tincher stated. “We have done that for quite a while now.” 
• Following an executive session, commissioners agreed to provide a letter of communication to the Greenbrier Planning Commission to proceed with next steps on their proposal to update the county zoning ordinance in regard to the current status of the Greenbrier County Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission held two public hearings in October regarding the adoption of a new zoning ordinance. The proposed ordinance may be found at www.greenbriercounty.net, or below. 

Bridgeport (West Virginia) hosts public meeting on updates to comprehensive plan

The Exponent Telegraph - Sept 30, 2024 - Damian Phillips

BRIDGEPORT, W.Va. (WV News) — Bridgeport held a public meeting Monday to let residents voice their thoughts about the future of their city by commenting on the next update to Bridgeport’s comprehensive plan.

The meeting was held Monday evening at The Bridge Sports Complex, and a second one will be held from 7:30 a.m. to 10 a.m. Tuesday at the same location.

“The comprehensive plan looks more at the bigger picture of the city: The airport, jobs, housing, the FBI, the mall and stuff like that,” said Mayor Andy Lang.

The meetings are being held to give residents an opportunity to speak with department heads, council members, Comprehensive Plan Committee members and the consultants hired to help draft the plan.

Per state code, all municipalities are required to update their comprehensive plans every 10 years. But Bridgeport updates its plan every five years, Lang said.

Rather than public hearings, the meetings are informal, informational sessions where residents can mingle with those involved in drafting the plan, said Council member Jon Griffith.

Anyone unable to make it to a meeting is encouraged to make their voice heard by filling out a survey on the future of the city at SurveyMonkey.com/r/BridgeportPlan.

While it’s not necessary to meet with residents when creating a comprehensive plan, Griffith said, “we feel it’s appropriate to get their opinions.”

“That means more to us than anything,” Lang said. “The dynamics of what the majority of citizens want to see in all these different aspects — fire, police, schools, child care. It’s really good to hear from them because you’d be surprised where a lot of good ideas come from.”

But Griffith said residents should be realistic about their expectations.

Installing a monorail or putting 90% of public funding towards middle school wrestling are “obviously unreasonable requests,” he said.

However, workable ideas about strengthening the city’s focus on specific programs will be considered seriously, Griffith said.

For example, residents may think the city should focus on housing or increasing access to transportation via more bus routes or more bike lanes, he said.

“Child care is always an issue,” Lang said, “as is how our relationship is with schools and affordable housing. One last thing that is near and dear to this citizen right here is keeping the old neighborhoods up.”

In addition to being used as a development tool for the city, Bridgeport’s comprehensive plan has been utilized by private developers.

“(WVU Medicine United Hospital Center) used it a lot when they did all their additions out there, and Charles Pointe has used it. We have our annual strategic planning meeting every year, and a lot of times we’ll reference the comprehensive plan in things we’re going to do going forward,” Lang said.

The mayor said retirees looking to downsize from a multistory house are a demographic that has “come alive” since he became mayor in 2017.

This need has been met in part by the construction of patio homes in White Oaks, but if more are needed, Lang encouraged the public to let it be known.

Following the two meetings, the comprehensive plan will not be ready immediately. The plan will be drafted, followed by more public meetings, and will then be put into the public record sometime next year, said Andrea Kerr, the city’s director of community development and head of the Comprehensive Plan Committee.

The entire process is expected to take between 15 and 16 months, she said.

West Virginia Watch - The YIMBY push for multifamily housing hits a ‘nope’ from homeowners

Sept 19, 2024 - Robbie Sequeira

When Minneapolis, then Oregon, then other local and state governments began stripping away exclusive single-family-home zoning over the past five years to allow the construction of multifamily housing, many development advocates predicted the start of a pro-YIMBY revolution.

But the “yes-in-my-backyard” movement has stumbled even before it’s really gotten started.

In court challenges around the country, opponents have cited spikes in traffic, strains to infrastructure, displacement of low-income residents, hits on property values and changes to neighborhood character. Multifamily zoning advocates, however, counter that opponents are resisting changes that will yield broader societal benefits.

The debates are challenging elected leaders, planning specialists, homebuilders and advocates, pitting long-established homeowners against a system desperate to get a handle on the nation’s growing crisis of housing affordability and homelessness.

“People want to maintain their neighborhood character, but it should be about ensuring quality of life for everyone,” said Natali Fani-Gonzalez, a Democratic member of the Montgomery County Council in Maryland who has endorsed changes to zoning laws. “You’re part of a community … you don’t own it. We need to evolve with society.”

‘I dread the possibility’

The most recent ruling arrived this month, when the Montana Supreme Court issued a decision paving the way for a pair of state laws to take effect over the objections of homeowners.

In 2023, Montana lawmakers were lauded for a bipartisan effort dubbed the “Montana Miracle,” a collection of measures that overrode local zoning ordinances to encourage more multifamily homes and accessory dwelling units, or ADUs — smaller secondary cottages or in-law apartments within or on a lot of a single-family home. The laws, championed by Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte, were supposed to go into effect Jan. 1, 2024.

But in December, a consortium of single-family homeowners from across the state called Montanans Against Irresponsible Densification, or MAID, filed a complaint. The group argued that the state had unconstitutionally taken away homeowners’ property rights and would wrest local control from cities and counties. The lawsuit warned, in part, that the laws meant new construction could begin down the block without notice.

“I dread the possibility of waking up one morning and finding that one of my neighbors has sold her property to a developer who is then erecting a multi-unit building or a duplex, or an accessory dwelling unit right next to our nice and carefully maintained single-family dwelling,” wrote Glenn Monahan, a Bozeman resident and managing partner of MAID, in an affidavit filed with the initial lawsuit and quoted in the court’s ruling.

“If such development aimed at increasing density in my neighborhood happens, I believe it will seriously and adversely affect the economic value of my property,” Monahan wrote. “More important than economic value is the moral, aesthetic neighborhood values that my wife and I share with the neighbors …”

Representatives for MAID did not return calls for comment.

Wealthier and whiter

Berkeley, California, first established a residential zone exclusively for single-family homes in 1916 — just as racist covenants banning home sales to non-whites were gaining steam nationally and other workarounds to preserve neighborhood segregation were being tested.

Today, around 75% of residential land in the United States is zoned exclusively for single-family homes. These neighborhoods are typically wealthier and whiter, according to a 2023 research report by the Urban Institute.

Minneapolis is credited as the first major U.S. city to enact substantial changes to increase density when it abolished single-family-only zoning citywide in 2019, allowing up to three dwelling units on any residential lot.

“People want to maintain their neighborhood character, but it should be about ensuring quality of life for everyone.”

– Natali Fani-Gonzalez, a Democratic member of the Montgomery County Council in Maryland

That same year, the Oregon legislature passed a law with two so-called upzoning provisions: allowing duplexes in single-family zoning areas of cities with at least 10,000 residents, and allowing townhouses, triplexes and fourplexes in cities of at least 25,000 residents.

Upzoning encompasses a range of policy tools — such as building more “missing middle” housing in the range between single-family homes and apartment buildings, focusing on transit-oriented development, lifting parking requirements, and increasing floor-to-area ratios. But researchers and planners told Stateline that it can take years for these policy changes to address current housing needs or undo the harms of restrictive zoning.

“The largest challenge is that zoning reform takes a really long time to implement. From the start of reform to actually seeing effects, it takes about 10 years,” said Stephen Menendian, assistant director and director of research at the University of California, Berkeley’s Othering & Belonging Institute.

“Even the Minneapolis reforms, which happened at warp speed, will take another four years to fully assess the effects,” Menendian said. “It’s been less a revolution and more of a slow shift.”

UC Berkeley’s Zoning Reform Tracker, last updated in November, provides an overview of municipal zoning reform efforts across the U.S., documenting 148 initiatives in 101 municipalities over a span of 17 years.

Other local governments have passed ordinances taking aim at single-family-only zoning in various ways, including Austin, Texas; the city of Alexandria and Arlington County in Virginia; Sacramento, California; and Portland, Oregon. Many have been challenged in court.

In Minneapolis, the 2040 plan, as the city’s long-term planning blueprint is known, was held up after its passage in 2019 by years of environmental lawsuits and back-and-forth rulings, delaying implementation.

Finally, state lawmakers in May passed a bill exempting comprehensive housing plans from environmental review, a measure aimed squarely at preserving the 2040 plan.

Even then, a county judge issued an injunction, forcing the city to halt parts of the plan and revise it.

Talking it out

Diana Drogaris, outreach coordinator for the National Zoning Atlas, a research organization that works to demystify zoning laws across the U.S., thinks city leaders are improving their communication with residents during public hearings and input sessions. However, she notes that leaders must balance transparency with managing valid fears of zoning changes.

“A zoning change is going to have an effect on the public. It will affect the store they go to, their commutes, what type of resources are available,” Drogaris said. “And I think community leaders are getting better at having these conversations.

“The public doesn’t need to know every nook and cranny of these outdated codes,” she said, “but enough to understand how that one zoning change is going to change how that land is being used in their community.”

Menendian argues that misconceptions on both sides — among housing advocates and concerned community members — fuel much of the anger. “There’s a lot of misnomers about zoning reform,” he said.

Homeowner groups also are expected to challenge a recent series of upzoning changes in Austin, approved at the end of 2023 and this spring. In 2022, a group of citizens successfully sued the city over a handful of ordinances designed to streamline housing development.

When a lawsuit is filed, work toward new housing developments may stop. California enacted a law in 2021 allowing property owners to split their lots and build two new homes in certain cities. In April, a Los Angeles judge ruled the law unconstitutional. In June, the state filed its notice of appeal.

Meanwhile, in Northern Virginia just outside the District of Columbia, the city of Alexandria and Arlington County, which also passed zoning changes last year, are facing their own legal challenges. The full impact of Alexandria’s zoning overhaul — even if it clears its legal challenges — may not do much to affect housing outcomes.  According to the city manager’s estimates, allowing up to four units in zones that are currently limited to single-family dwellings would only create a net new 178 units over 10 years.

‘Absolutely … some sort of backlash’

This fall, both Montgomery County, Maryland, and Berkeley, California, will be considering upzoning proposals, following a summer filled with contentious public hearings.

Fani-Gonzalez, the Montgomery County councilmember, said that modernizing the county’s zoning, in conjunction with other policies such as rent stabilization, will help keep residents in their homes while creating new housing to accommodate the growth associated with being just outside Washington, D.C.

“We need more housing, but we cannot get stuck with building cookie-cutter houses that only certain folks can actually afford,” said Fani-Gonzalez.

In California, the city of Berkeley’s proposal to end exclusionary zoning in its neighborhoods is part of a broader effort to undo its racist legacy. The Berkeley City Council took its first steps in examining that legacy by denouncing the racist history of single-family zoning in 2021, a largely ceremonial move that gained steam when the city council asked the city for a report on missing-middle housing.

The city’s latest upzoning plan was scaled back this summer after a five-hour public hearing.

Lori Droste, a Berkeley councilmember from 2014 to 2022, told Stateline that she had been advocating for major upzoning changes since 2016 but struggled to get the votes. What changed, she said, was linking the need for zoning changes to the national consciousness raised by 2020 protests around systemic racism and racial injustice.

“Zoning reform is going to take time. It’s probably going to take 20 years before anyone notices real changes. But if we don’t start now, the housing crisis will only get worse,” she said.

When asked by Stateline if she expects any legal action if the upzoning proposal is successful, Droste responded, “I imagine there will be. I’m not in the city attorney’s office, but absolutely there’s going to be some sort of backlash.”