Paving Over a Forest at Hellwig Park to Subsidize a Developer – Just How Rich Is the Park Authority?
The county Park Authority must have discovered a sofa in the office that was filled with change behind the cushions. They want to spend money on an unplanned road, one that is not needed. There’s a rumor running rampant that some people are experiencing a recession and some government agencies are struggling for money… but the Park Authority thinks it is rich.
For over four years, the Park Authority has been planning new ballfields at Hellwig Park. Prince William adopted an ambitious 20-year Transportation Plan six months ago that will require $3-$4 billion in new funding to build 700 more miles of road over the next 20 years. Until very recently, the Park Authority was clear on what it needed – and no plans included bisecting the park with a new Hellwig Highway to Aden Road.
Now, the Park Authority has discovered they just gotta build a new road. On June 2, the Planning Commission approved the long-planned new entrance for the park on Bristow Road, but rejected the unplanned connection to Aden Road. On September 14 the Board of Supervisors will consider the Park Authority’s appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision.
Why would the Park Authority be so anxious to add a new project to an already underfunded list of new roads, and redirect scarce park bond money to a road project? Hint: This new road would provide access to unbuilt lots in the Liberty Oaks subdivision, saving the developer the cost of building their own road. Bonds sold to develop public parks will instead be used to subsidize a private developer.
Even more interesting, the Park Authority has committed to pay the developer who needs access to the unbuilt residential lots $315,000 for the land where the road will be built. That is significantly more than the asking price for other lots in that development. Whoever sat in that Park Authority sofa, spilling change out of their pocket, must have been loaded.
The Park Authority has struggled to find excuses for this project. The plan for new ballfields at Hellwig Park never included any connection between Hellwig Park and Aden Road. Instead, the agency designed an upgrade to the entrance at Bristow Road, so traffic can move smoothly in and out of Hellwig Park after events.
To make matters worse, the new road would go through a conservation area intended to protect one wetland. The road will be just 30 feet from the edge of another wetland. The Park Authority says they are responsible stewards and can protect these wetlands from the impacts but history tells a different story. The Park Authority is incompetent at protecting natural areas within its own parks, and a polluter that damages areas outside park boundaries.
Stormwater blowouts from their current construction at Hellwig Park have already damaged the remaining wetlands at the park and a privately-owned pond located much further than 30 feet away. The Park Authority’s demonstrated a la-dee-dah attitude toward complying with violation notices, making no progress at mitigating the damages for more than two months.
The Planning Commission denied the Park Authority’s application to build this “back entrance” to Hellwig Park, and more than 300 people have signed a petition opposing the project. In addition, the Lake Ridge Occoquan Coles Civic Association (LOCCA), the Mid-County Civic Association of Prince William (MIDCO), and the Ridgeview Estates Home Owners Association have also written letters in opposition.
Conserve Prince William 2 
AC/DC comes to mind Charlie. “highway to HELLwig” !
[…] Your Piece of the Planet The county Park Authority must have discovered a sofa in the office that was filled with change […]
I could not agree with you more, Elena.
Why build a second road when NO other recreational facility in Northern Virginia has 2 entrances?! FIX the front and give proposition 328 a chance. Change the word Peace to 328 and sing along with John Lennon:
I live directly behind the Hellwig park complex. I am alarmed, on many levels, by the prospect of a second entrance to the park from Aden Rd. The price of such a project, in this recession, is irresponsible and capricious. Moreover, the danger posed by a second entrance onto Aden road is real and imminent. Aden Road is already a dangerous corridor and a short ride on it is often high adventure.
Hundreds of residents are opposed to the addition of a second entrance to Hellwig park. The REAL soultion is a well-conceived replanning of the main entrance to Hellwig Park on Bristow Rd.
Long Park is of a similar size(number of fields etc) as Hellwig and had similar “congestion” issues. They fixed the front entrance thus resolving the traffic and saftey issues…there is no reason why this would not work for Hellwig park also. The proposed new road would be a waste of tax payer dollars, create more traffic/safety concerns and ruin the wetlands. On another note, If the PA has all that money to burn(or just hand over to any developer that comes by)…Mr. Ellington, I have a bridge I was thinking of selling($315,000)you can put it wherever you want(believe me, that is a great price for a bridge)…call me..we’ll talk.
I think it is an insult to the residents of Prince William County. In these times of finacial hardships, where I have seen my daughters daycare enrollment drop substantially because parents have lost their jobs and can no longer afford daycare. In a county where Residents leave the county because we have such a long waiting list for finacial assistance(because of the large number of residence already receiving assistance) to reside in Fairfax Co. where they can immediately begin receiving assistance for housing and groceries. In a county where my house has continued to steadily lose value yet my total property tax bill goes up or stayed the same because of the large increases in real estate property tax rates that the BOCS has approved YEAR AFTER YEAR!!! You now want to go to county residents and ask them to take more money out of their pockets which are already shallow if not empty and help pay for a road that would possibly benefit a handful of people for a few days out of the year so they can get home after a ball game 5 minutes faster…IF even that. When you have already approved the Park Authority to move forward with Realigning the front entrance, which I believe is necessary, but will cost tax payers money, you want to ask them for more money for the same park for something NO ONE can give a hard and fast answer to WHY the road is needed or IF it will have any impact on travel. The parks states SAFETY Reasons but gives no particular reasons, if you are concerned with saftey the last thing you should do is send families with childern out to Aden Rd to pull out of basically blind entrance in which traffic is quite often traveling considerably faster than the posted speed limit. There is nothing safe about trying to pull out onto Aden Rd from the proposed Road exit.
This is SUCH a waste of PWC taxpayer money. If PWC has so much $ to blow on needless and unwanted projects like this, why are they always cying the money blues?? Seems to me this is a “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours scheme” between the developer and the PA. I live on Aden Road and this proposed entrance would have an adverse impact on Aden Road traffic. It is already very difficult to get out of my street onto Aden now, no one pays any attention to the speed limit. I can only imagine what it would be like with even more crazy drivers out there on the weekend.
Please help me understand why the county is paying almost $100,000 more for land in a down economy. Also, why are they “funding” the road and then allowing the developer to use it for future projects that will only put more money in his pocket. In addition, the “future projects” seem to be questionable as they would most likely require less than 10 acres to build a house. Maybe he has mysterious family members to subdivide the land just like the Avendale development debacle – so much for the rural crescent. Great to see PW has a surplus of money – how about using it more wisely and for something that is needed or wanted!!!!
I find it very disrespectful that the Park Authority negotiated a contract with the developer in December 2009 long before they ever brought this issue to the Prince William County residents (and did they or did we find out on our own). I was taught the government worked for us and the elected officials represented us. Along with being disrepectful, I feel the Park Authority, by taking this forward after many citizens spoke against it in May and the Planning Commission denied it, is thumbing their nose at us and saying “we can get this passed anyway”. Frankly, this is not the way I want my county government acting.
How the Park Authority has convinced themselves that this is in the best interest of the community is beyond my reasonable line of comprehension.
The Park Authority is going to tear up wetlands to build a second entrance to Hellwig park using funds that they don’t have currently in their coffors. I wonder how long this construction project will take and how long or how many stages it will go through until the Park Authority can afford to complete the project if approved by the County Supervisors.
I question how much damage will result to the wetlands ans how many accidents will be caused by this new entrance on Aden road in which most traffic will be turning left back toward Woodbridge. What about the citizens who purchased property on either side of the proposed park entrance for the very reason that their homes were backed against protected wetlands? Who is protecting the wetlands?
It amazes me that the Park Authority and the local developer seem to have formed such a union that they would even propose such a preposterous idea. Maybe that is why they only gave the citizens affected by this road (14 landowners) a weeks notice prior to the original public hearing – to prevent a public outcry.
The county approved a new entrance, I don’t understand why the Park Authority isn’t satisfied with that decision seeing how they have funds to start the new entrance (save for a traffic signal). I understand what the developers motivation is behind this project, but I don’t understand what the Park Authority is getting out of a new entrance. I would think the approval of rebuilding the existing entrance (a viable solution for all parties involved) would satisfy the Park Authority.
I haven’t heard sufficient evidence from the Park Authority about the wetland protection studies, Impact studies on from theTransportation Department or any other County office that gives reasonable and credible support for this proposal.
If you agree, voice your opinion and don’t let this measure pass through the Board of Supervisors without letting your voice be heard.
I wonder how many PWC residents living in districts that have less than their fair share of parks, would approve of spending land acquisition money on this road project? How about spending it to develop neighborhood parks that kids and families might actually be able to walk to?
As a local resident of the Aden Road Corridor I am appalled at the park authority and their lack of concern not only for the local residents, but the environment in which they fail to demonstrate any competence in being good stewards of the land or tax payer money. I believe that they should fix the main entrance to Hellwig park; realign it with the new Independent Hill Drive and why this wasn’t done properly in the first place escapes me; another show of a lack of forethought in this matter.
This either shows a lack of competence or a lack of concern and in both cases I am deeply troubled over who might be minding the store. Or is the park authority just running wild or perhaps they have a private agenda?
Again, I am overwhelmed the attitude of the PA. After a defeat with the Planning Commission – at which an overwhelming majority of citizens who actually live by the park spoke out against the proposed road – the PA is willing to bypass the will of the most heavily affected residents. The only people who spoke in favor of the proposed road seemed to be confusing that issue with the construction of baseball diamonds. I recall no one speaking out against expanding the sports fields; indeed, nearly everyone seemed to agree that the entrance to the park required improvement to allow better ingress/egress for those using the park. The proposed road opening onto Aden road is a separate issue, one that involves genuine concerns about safety, planning, conservation, practicality, finance, transparency and, at least in my eyes, a degree of disingenuousness on the part of the PA.
The proposed road would lie outside the recommended distance from fire/rescue stations, create another potential entry/exit hazard on an already dangerous road, provide the same additional entry/exit for wrong-doers, encroach on a protected wetlands area, negatively affect the quality of life for those who live adjacent to the park, waste limited county funds, and provide a spurious benefit to only a very few park-users who may approch the park from Aden Road. The only real benefit I can see is for the development company. I can’t help but wonder where one would end up by following the money trail.
I am greatly angered by the willingness of the PA to dismiss the will of the people and the Planning Commission. I should not be surprised as the PA took pains to notify as few people in the affected area as possible. If it were not for the efforts of neighbor who remains well-informed, most of us in that area would be completely unaware, which, I suspect, is exactly what the PA would prefer. At the Planning Commission meeting it became patently obvious that the PA was unable, or unwilling, to provide any reasonable support for the expense of the land or details of the proposed road, and could not even establish any accurate description for the project, offering only the vaguest explanations and responses to Planning Commission questions.
Lacking resonable justification for pushing the project through, having demonstrated inability to manage current environmental responsibilies, and showing utter disregard for the concerns of the area residents, the PA has displayed a sadly cavalier approach its mission and duty to the citizenry. As another commenter said, this is not the way I want my county government to behave.
The Park Authority’s idea of realigning the front entrance to solve the congestion issue in Hellwig Park is a wonderful solution. This is a poorly designed entrance which has resulted in congestion and safety issues. The intersection redesign at Long Park solved those congestion issues. However, more is not better and the idea of a rear entrance off Aden road that just transfers congestion back to the current location and brings with it many probable negative consequences is not a good plan for the participants of the park, the neighborhoods and drivers along Aden and all of the PWC taxpayers. Significant safety and security issues, fiscal concerns and the destruction of conservation areas and wetlands were addressed at the initial hearing and need to be considered seriously when making a decision about this road. I am hopeful that the Board of County Supervisors does the right thing for ALL concerned and votes NO to this proposal at the public hearing on September 14th.
I believe this is NOT the time to be spending money on another drive way to a park..This area is growing in leaps and bounds. Many new roads will be needed AND I see roads thatneed re-surfaced badly… This is just ANOTHER example of POOR governmental spending…
At the June 2 meeting before the Planning Board, acronyms like NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) and BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything) were applied to the citizens opposed to an Aden Road entrance into Hellwig Park. We can expect more of the same on September 14, with the addition of children to play on the heartstrings of the Board of County Supervisors. Don’t be fooled. The ball fields are already in use in the park, and no one opposes Little League. The children don’t care how they get into the park as long as they can play ball. Even if Proposition 329 passes, these children may well be in college before a road is built. This vote has nothing to do with children. The issue is responsible government. Do we want Prince William to be a county where decisions are made based on backroom deals and campaign contributions? What has happened to “of the people, by the people, and for the people”?
What is the board thinking this time? The planning commision and citizens have made their opinions,needs and concerns known. Just remember us palrty little old citizens VOTE.
From a strictly clinical perspective, it is fascinating to watch proposals such as the Hellwig Park Memorial Road-to-No-Where take on a life of their own. Just like Alaska’s infamous Bridge-to-No-Where, somehow the governmental bureaucracy becomes convinced that a particular governmental expenditure will solve all problems–feed the hungry, cure disease, create prosperity, and improve the weather. Not only will it provide all these benefits, but it will not cost the bureaucracy anything–the tax-payers will fund it. Is it hubris run amuck or just a simple case of self-delusion?
The ultimate irony is that the Park Authority claims to be acting in the interest of our children–making the park more accessible and making the park safer. The reality of the proposed road-to-nowhere is just the opposite.
A) If you study the PWC Demographic Mapper web page carefully, you will see that less than 4% of school-age athletes travel to Hellwig Park on Aden Rd. from the direction of Nokesville. This small number of children would be benefited by the road-to-no-where. However, more than 96% of the children would have their travel time and distance increased. The typical athlete living in one of the developments off Hoadley Rd. would experience a 30% increase in travel time and distance to use the road-to-no-where. How does that make the park more accessible? In addition, the vast majority of ball-players would still have to pass by the bottleneck at the current entrance on Bristow Rd. And further, if all the athletes were to use the road-to-no-where, they would create a huge new traffic jamb at the four-way stop where Aden Rd. and Joplin Rd. cross. How does that make the Park Authority a friend of ball-players?
B) Safety is an emotional issue. Who can be against the safety of little children? But consider these points:
1) The chief of the Coles Rescue Squad has stated they would not use the road-to-no-where. It would double their response time to the back fields.
2) The 2008 Comprehensive Plan for the PWC Police embraces Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED). One strategy is Access Control–“Generally crime perpetrators will avoid areas that only allow them with one way to enter and exit.” Other things being equal, one entrance/exit is safer than two.
3) There seems to be a concern that, if there is a major accident blocking the main entrance/exit, then the children could be trapped in the park with no way home. Concerned parents should be relieved to know that there already is an emergency exit on Bristow Rd. at the eastern corner of the park. Further, if and when the main entrance/exit is ever realigned, the Park Authority would be smart to convert the old entrance/exit into another emergency exit.
4) None of the other PWC parks have more than one entrance. Some of them have more fields than Hellwig; others have more acres than Hellwig. Are these parks unsafe?
So the question remains–why is the Park Authority against our children? What did our kids ever do to the Park Authority to deserve this kind of treatment.
Yet another developer benefit project financed with taxpayer funds using children as bait.
This disturbing trend of abusing children’s hopes and dreams has been used three times now in recent PWC history. The Witta Tract, Avendale and now Hellwig all roped in parental support by involving children. At Avendale the carrot was soccer fields when only raw land was proffered with no means to pay for the field construction. If the fields are ever built it will be years down the road, but the parents brought their kids out in droves to support the developer’s needs. Now, the Little League parents have been stirred up to support a developer benefit project that they’ve been told is essential for safety. Shameful, but unfortunately part of a new trend downward for PWC.
What’s next- parents being convinced that public water and sewer in the Rural Crescent is the only way to protect their childrens health?
Here’s all you have to know to understand why this is being pursued and likely approved by the BOCS.
1. Property is owned by Liberty Oaks LLC
2. It’s agent is Mike Lubely
3. It’s address is the same as Creative Concepts
4. Which is owned by Mark Granville-Smith
5. Who has contributed thousands to Wally, Corey and others on the BOCS
6. He also heads the Builders Assoc. which has donated thousands more.
Getting the picture, land-use in PWC has nothing to do with good public policy but everything to do with campaign contributions. Y
“You can get everything you want at Alic…, err, Corey’s/Wally’s restaurant”
I couldn’t agree more with all of the above.Yes to prop 328,no to 329. This voter has a long memory.
Anyone who thinks the Park Authority is able to build an environmentally neutral road through the 200 ft. gap between the designated wetlands and the conservation area needs to visit the two western-most diamond ball-fields at the back corner of Hellwig Park.
Standing at the back edge of the fields, you can see a nicely manicured slope ending at a chain-link fence, which is held in place by 2-in., cylindrical metal posts. Attached to the chain-link fence is a black, solid plastic silt-fence with its bottom tucked under the dirt. It all looks so very nice. However, on the other side, hidden from view by the silt-fence, the ground is littered with debris–3-gal. and 5-gal. plastic pots for smaller plantings, the remains of rusted, wire baskets for larger plantings, 2″ x 2″ wood posts (from previous silt fences?), small dead trees (whole 8-ft trees–branches, trunks, and bare roots) that did not survive planting, worker water-bottles, etc. You get the picture. (And PS, black plastic silt-fences shred after about 2 or 3 years of exposure to the weather.)
The fencing ends between the two ball-fields. Here a large (24″ to 30″ diameter) concrete culvert (a storm sewer) sticks out of the hill. There is a narrow (4 ft.), shallow (6 in.) swale running from the storm sewer down around the outside of the curved hill. Every 40 to 50 ft. there is a rock dam to slow the rush of the water. The rock dams are about 1 ft. high and tied in to the hill on one side. The other side of the dam just sticks up into the air. So when the gushing water hits the rock dam, some of the water goes through the rocks, but most of the water ponds behind the rocks and overflows the outside edge of the swale. A lightly wooded hill leads from the swale to the water course in the middle of the conservation area, just 50 ft. from the edge of the park. It is clear from the clumping of leaves and the etchings in the dirt that a lot of water has flooded down this hill recently. All the lawn chemicals from the fields and all the sediment from the hill are washed into the conservation area and into the pond, which has no exit, and which has been described as “the highest quality non-tidal wetland … ever seen.”
At the end of the swale, the chain-link silt-fence begins again and forms a large, flat, half-moon area at the bottom of the hill from the corner ball-field. This area would make an excellent location for a large catch basin, equipped with an outflow valve calibrated to release a non-flooding amount of water to the conservation area. The rest of the water would sink into the ground or evaporate over time. The swale leading to the catch basin should be wider and deeper; and its entire length should be lined with stone, but the Park Authority has not thought of this or does not care.
(Nothing here addresses the mess the Park Authority has made of Holland’s pond. See the video on this site under heading “Park Authority cannot protect environmental resources at Hellwig Park”.)
The Park Authority does not have the skills to plan or execute environmentally sensitive projects.
CLARIFICATION to my comments posted above.
200 ft. may seem like a wide area for a road to pass through. But consider that the proposed road makes a 90° turn at this point. Further, both the conservation area and the wetlands are down a steep slope from the proposed road. The seller’s site plan brings the paved part of the road to within 40 ft. of the conservation area and 50 ft. of the wetlands. Add shoulders and you’re within spitting distance. And finally, even the Park Authority admits that the soils in this location are not strong enough to support a road–more extensive construction would be required.
I was a late-comer to this fight. It wasn’t going to get invloved until I read the staff report that said the PWCPA’s was doing this to protect an environmentally sensitive area (which, is already protected and was recently damaged by, who else, the PWCPA) by building a road through it (weaving between a wetlands and a vernal pool up a steep slope – $$$$) and relieve congestion in the park (by routing park patrons onto a bad road and back around to the front of the park). Then I found out that the PWCPA is paying WAY more for the swamp and steep hill than the other lots are going for, that the PWCPA is paying for the whole road and the developer is advertising this as a done deal. My eyesight isn’t 20/20 but I can still see this deal is a turkey for the taxpayer. I still support fixing the front entrance to deal with traffic (even if it mean another stoplight) but the back entrance is a dubious and expensive fix!
If the Park Authority has all this extra money to pay over the asking price for this lot; are they going to have extra money just lying around when both entrances need fixed because both of them are now hazardous? The Park Authority seems oblivious or they just don’t care about the damage they have already done and continue to do to the surrounding wetlands. What ever happen to all the citations they received, were these problems ever fixed? Will they ever be fixed? Shouldn’t the Park Authority be spending all this found money on fixing the front entrance and trying to repair the damage they have done to the wetlands? Not lining the pockets of the developer. It’s sad to see that money can mean more to people than safety of children, surrounding residents and the environment. There will always be more money, but as far as the wetlands some of that damage is irreversible and no amount of money can fix it. I would like to see my taxpayer money go to fix the main entrance and stop the damage to the wetlands.
Dear NOVASC Board Member,
I am severely displeased by the Park Authority’s position on this proposal. The proposed Aden access is ill conceived with multiple negative aspects and few returns on investments. For example:
• No study was conducted to determine if the road is cost effective and if the proposed modifications to the main entrance would alleviate the traffic concerns. I did not do an official study, but as a user of the park, and by a quick population density assessment from internet information, it is clearly recognizable that the majority of the population in the county is to the North and North-east of Hellwig Park. (Reference: http://www.dof.virginia.gov/regCentral/pwm-info-pop-map.shtml) The areas that the Aden corridor would service are sparsely populated and committing such a large amount of money to allow that limited access is in my opinion not cost efficient.
• The proposed new main entrance modifications will do much to improve the congestion that is the primary issue with the access to the park. I am a user of the park and also transit that area often during peak periods. The alignment will, in my opinion, fix all the issues even with the addition of the new ball fields. These peak times are limited to mostly weekends at certain times and the new entrance will alleviate the traffic problem. Yes this is my opinion, but it is as good as the Park proposals opinion that it will not fix the issues as they have no official study to disprove either opinion. I think the spending of our money deserves at least an investigation into if the Aden Road access is required. I believe that if they have a couch full of money that the park could be better served by spending the money on waste disposal facilities and land acquisition for natural areas.
In addition to the cost benefit issue there is a safety issue. Aden road is a rural road that is already exceeded its original design requirements. The country road once used by farmers and rural families is now often used as an alternate route when I-95 is locked with traffic and as an access by Stafford and Fauquier County commuters enroute to DC. The winding rural road also entices thrill seekers and bikers who enjoy the road’s challenges. The combination of these factors has already proved deadly for some Aden Road Travelers.
The information the Park Authority feeds the organizations using the park claims that not having the Aden Road access will cause safety issues in the park. In fact, the access will provide a shortcut to SR 234 that will bring additional traffic through the park. This short cut will take .3 miles off the distance from the proposed new access to the intersection of Independent Hill Rd. and Bristow Rd. These transients are cutting the corner to save time so it can be assumed that slowing down through the park will not be the greatest concern. This additional traffic speeding through the parking lots is a serious hazard that will affect the safety of park users.
As a final consideration take to heart the ultimate use of the land. It is a PARK! It is an area that is set aside to preserve nature and prohibit the over saturation of man. Building a road is contradictory to the parks purpose and an unnatural addition. The area to be annexed and destroyed to build the road has been described by the Park Authority as one of the most pristine wetlands in all the surrounding areas. Why would the Park Authority propose destroying such wetlands to build a road that will be used by few? The developer states that there will be provisions to prohibit such damage, but building the road through the wetlands will by nature destroy the wetlands and the precautions are ineffective. If you are in doubt ask the owner of the pond on Keanon Ridge Ct. about the silt damage the current construction has produced.
I won’t comment on the politics of this land acquisition as I am not in possession of facts that support my assumptions. I will just say that I am suspicious of the relationship between the Park authority and the developer. I make no accusations, but I certainly hope that this kind of activity does not impede the fair process of determining the needs of the park.
[…] approved, the Park Authority would move forward with their plans purchase a 10-acre parcel for $70,000 over the advertised asking price in order to construct a new public road. This new road […]