Village of Catlett defeated, developer considers lawsuit

To almost nobody’s surprise, Fauquier County’s supervisors last week rejected the 225-home Village of Catlett proposal.

But landowner Catlett Farm LLC’s battle to develop the 793-acre property at Route. 28 and Dumfries Road may not be over.

Under Virginia law, Catlett Farm has 30 days from the Dec. 8 board decision within which to file suit against the county in Fauquier County Circuit Court.

Asked Friday if his client planned to appeal the board’s decision to the court, Warrenton lawyer Henry Day said, “We’re considering options, and it’s one of the options. But no decision has been made.”

From its inception more than two years ago, the Village of Catlett has stirred heated debate about the potential negative effects of growth and development.

But in the opinion of some, the proposal proved particularly appealing because it appeared to offer Fauquier the best chance of solving failing drain-field problems that have plagued Catlett and Calverton since the 1960s.

After more than an hour-long public hearing last Thursday night, the board voted 3-2 to deny the Village of Catlett proposal, which also called for 85,000 square feet of commercial space.

Additionally, the landowner pledged to build a $6.3 million, 160,000-gallon per day wastewater treatment plant to serve the project and failing drain-fields in the Catlett and Calverton Service Districts.

The landowner declined comment Thursday, after the board decision.

But in a prepared statement said, “We are very disappointed with the board’s failure to approve our request. The Catlett farm proposal is consistent with the county’s comprehensive plan, directs well-designed growth into the service district and would have resolved a 40-year environmental and health problem of failing drain-fields in Catlett and Calverton at an affordable cost without permanent county taxpayer subsidies.”

The developer said it would cost about $18,000 per sewer connection, about the same amount to hook up to a Fauquier County Water and Sanitation Authority (WSA) treatment system.

But opponents, like Citizens for Fauquier County (CFFC), claim the hookups could cost as much as $25,000 per connection.

Fauquier Supervisors Peter Schwartz (Marshall District), Terry Nyhous (Center District) and Holder Trumbo (Scott District) voted against the project. Board Chairman Ray Graham (Cedar Run District) and Chester Stribling (Lee District) supported it.

Schwartz played a key role in negotiations with the Village of Catlett proposal representatives.

“In some ways, I wish it had-n’t been moved tonight” for a vote, Schwartz said last Thursday, suggesting that more study might have resulted in an acceptable agreement that would satisfy the developer and finally address drainfield problems.

He noted that under the developer’s proposal, Catlett and Calverton property owners would pay approximately the same amount for sewer connections as other WSA customers.

But Schwartz repeated two key concerns about providing sewer to the two communities. Before committing to the project, he believed the county needed to prepare an information packet and survey that would go to all Catlett and Calverton property owners who would be affected by the sewer proposal.

In an interview last week, Schwartz said he believes such landowners should fully understand the cost of sewer and their financial obligations. With that knowledge they could complete a survey, indicating whether they support the proposed sewer plan.

He also believes Fauquier needed to secure a written commitment from the WSA to own, operate and maintain the system before voting on the Village of Catlett.

In part, Nyhous voted against the Village of Catlett proposal because he believes an alternative treatment system could be built independently, using low- or zero-interest loans, grants and user connection fees.

Financing a $7.8 million system for property owners with failing drainfields could be completed in 15 to 20 years, he said.

Nyhous contrasted that cost with the infrastructure expenses associated with the Village of Catlett. Once fully built, the project would demand $800,000 more in public service costs annually than it would generate in revenue, according to a county staff analysis.

The public services costs would continue to grow, unlike the construction expense of a plant once the debt disappears over a fixed period, he said.

Trumbo didn’t explain his vote against the Village of Catlett plan.

For about 23 minutes, Graham talked about his nearly 12-year struggle to find a solution to failing drainfields in Catlett and Calverton, which he represents.

Options involved the Marine Corps base at Quantico and running a line to Bealeton or WSA’s treatment plant in Remington.

In many respects, he believes the Village of Catlett proposal represented the best option available to the county since he joined the board in 2000, noting that alternative approaches would cost users $120 to $180 in monthly service fees.

Under the Village of Catlett proposal, the monthly sewer fee would be about $68 per month, which most WSA customers pay, said Graham, who also serves on the authority’s board.