In a tap dance worthy of the Macy's Day Parade, Virginia Beach citizens were forced to endure another evening of sidestepping and double talk over the Wycliffe Development. The one thing that was crystal clear is that this production has been highly orchestrated. And despite the monologues to the contrary, we have no more certain protection for the lake (or VB Wetlands) today than we did yesterday. We just have words. Lots of words. 

The opening performance was the attorney's request for a "REFERRAL" (not a deferral as advertised) to toss this hot potato back to the Planning Commission, who already voted against the Application back in August. The reason given by the attorney is that they discovered "significant NEW information" that a city-owned easement exists on the property that the Planning Commission was not privy to. Therefore, the developer would like the opportunity to revise his plan to remove the lake infill and have the the church resubmit the application to remove the CUP.  

Pull back the curtain and know that everyone involved has known about the easement. When the Vice Mayor says that "they didn't know," understand that you are watching either a work of fantasy or dereliction of duty unfold. The community informed the attorney in July 2023 of the existence of this easement, one that the church of course has always known about. The city has known about it too considering $160,000 of tax payer dollars were recently invested in dredging and tree removal. Maybe Council didn't know? Nope. Numerous emails were sent to the Planning Commission and to City Council advising them of this easement. Maybe they didn't read them? Speakers at the previous planning commission hearing and deferred city council hearings spoke on the subject. This is all a matter of public record. Maybe they weren't listening? Inexcusable. We sent a 33 page booklet to each City Council member AND their attorney in September to ensure they had all pertinent information on this property in order to do their due dilligence. On page 13, that easement is very prominently highlighted and discussed in red bold print. It is simply not acceptable for any party to pretend that this easement was just discovered. 

So, why the song and dance? Because our City Council does not want to pass legislation protecting our waterways. 

To revisit, in September 2021, City Council unanimously signed the stormwater resolution committing to “recommend the denial of any project or development that generates a net increase in water discharge demand in any watershed or in any drainage system..." Subsequently, they refused to enact this legislation while taking your increased tax revenues to pay for flood mitigation projects. Why? They professed to not knowing what they were signing…sound familiar?

If this had been enacted, this project would never have seen the light of day. 

In response to the obligation to implement this regulation, in August 2022, Mayor Dyer “relieved the Process Improvement Steering Committee of the responsibility for a formal recommendation regarding the Comprehensive Plan and stormwater language." 

There does not appear to be any intention to honor their Sept 2021 commitment. They have been called out by members of the current and previous councils for violating the public trust. And we can't find evidence to the contrary.

The solo act on City Council was Councilman Chris Taylor, voicing his opposition to any development on the parcel after careful consideration to all interests. In contrast, several members of the Council have been pushing 5-6 homes to be developed on the property, despite the Planning Commission recommendation and despite residents' concerns. Why the dilligent work on behalf of the developer? In a district outside of their own? 

The mayor and attorney then danced around a conversation about property rights in the "Commonwealth" (which is actually a government structure based upon the common good) and not interfering with the sale of private property, which has actually never been in question. The attorney emphasized that the builder wants to put forth a development plan whereby the “status quo would stay the same for the vast majority of this property” while simultaneously suggesting that an office building, parking lot, and 5 houses will fit on the remaining 3 acres when the lake and it's buffer is extracted. If that sounds like a work of fiction, it’s because it IS. Councilwoman Barbara Henley even raised an eyebrow on this proposal. The suggestion of this amount of development around the lake is a level of tone deafness that should not be entertained by our city leaders. 

In the end, City Council voted to send this back to Planning Commission so they could look at it “fairly” and with “complete information.” Despite this being an outright and unjust insult to the people they appointed, it's the method by which our City Council avoided voting to protect our waterways. 

Pretending to be ignorant of information in the full spotlight of public scrutiny seems worthy of further investigation. For now, we will be thankful that City Council has recognized publicly that the lake should never have been at stake and we will continue to work towards legislating protection for all of Virginia Beach's neighborhood waterways. 

Happy Thanksgiving!