Lori Graham
Contributing writer
ELLISTON – A vote on a comprehensive plan change to the 633.72-acre property in Elliston known locally as the historic Fotheringay estate has been moved to the next regular Board of Supervisors meeting, April 28 at 7 p.m., for further discussion.
The location in eastern Montgomery County is proposed for development into an approximately 400-home project. The change would be from a “Resource Stewardship” to “Village Expansion” designation, and would designate 307.72 acres of the total 633.72 acres in Village Expansion as Open Space, with the remaining 326 acres designated as Medium-Density Residential, within the Elliston Lafayette Village.
The decision not to extend a vote by the supervisors at the April 14 meeting occurred due to a large public response in opposition to the amendment.
Planning GIS Director Brea Hopkins presented information to the Montgomery County Board of Supervisors during the meeting.
“In regards to the changing conditions, at the time of the adoption of the 2025 comp. plan, public water and sewer were not extended to this property,” Hopkins said. “We did not know that there would be an elementary school there, so we did not know it would be extended.”
This extension continues now to the property under consideration for the housing development. Although cattle are grazing on the open fields of the property currently, Hopkins said that the farming operations on the property have decreased, and the property has been withdrawn from the agricultural forestal district.
A large concern from local community members has been the destruction of not only historical property but a viewscape enjoyed by many either living or passing through Elliston Valley. A 1796 home, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and adjacent cemetery are on the property. However, Hopkins said that portion of the property does not have an impact on the development planned for the property, and an open space would provide a buffer for the home. According to the proposed ordinance at www.montva.com, 326 acres would be designated as medium-density residential for homes, with the remaining 307.72 acres remaining as open space.
The Montgomery County Planning Commission recommended approval with a 5-2 vote on March 19, 2025. Many community members attended the commission’s public hearing to participate in the discussion.
“How would a potential amendment to the 2025 Comprehensive Plan in this case affect any updates that are drawn up or laid out in the Montgomery Matters update to the Comprehensive Plan, asked Supervisor Anthony Grafsky.
Hopkins explained that if the property meets with the criteria to be included in the expansion of the village, then it is viable for development.
“We do have owners that had conservation easements in several of our villages and that’s why some of those village boundaries look a little weird is because they said ‘we’re in a conservation easement. We don’t want to be in a village, we’re never going to develop. So, we drew the boundary around their properties.”
“If we were to grant the amendment… could you through the evaluation process of the updated comprehensive plan be, like, no, this shouldn’t be,” Grafsky asked.
“No, we wouldn’t do that,” Hopkins said.
In order to further develop on the open space, the property owner(s) would have to complete the process again, receiving approval of a policy change on the comprehensive plan and going through the rezoning process.
Supervisor April DeMotts opened the citizen comments section of the meeting for the public hearing on the property, resulting in a mixed response from the public.
Sandra Wellons of Elliston, living across from the Eastern Montgomery High School, said, “My concern is flooding because my house has been flooded twice…once in ’99 and once in 2000.”
“You know I understand this is a very emotional and complex issue for a lot of people and I respect that; however, I believe my opinion is grounded in fact and the long-term view of our community’s future,” Allen Childress of Shawsville said. “This project has the potential to meaningfully address housing needs in our part of the county.”
“Locals know that anywhere what’s to be developed, it would be this property,” Zach Milton, a graduate of Eastern Montgomery High School, said. “It has great proximity to our schools, available utilities, and probably most importantly the owners do not live here.” Milton went on to say that this year marks his 20-year anniversary of graduating from Eastern Montgomery High School and the graduating class has not grown in size and the school is not able to fully utilize the space in the school losing the availability of some courses as a result.
Speaking in opposition to the comprehensive plan amendment, Kimberly Homer said, “Please, please do not ‘Blacksburg’ Elliston.”
“I’ve lived in Blacksburg since 1980, and it’s a college town, I get it, but talk to anyone who lives in Loudon County, talk to anybody who lives in Chester, Pennsylvania, it’s not better,” she said. “And these houses that are going to be built are not going to be occupied by people who are homeless. Nobody who is homeless can get a mortgage. Nobody that lives in Elliston now and doesn’t own a home is going to be able to get a mortgage.”
“The home that we live in was built in 1760,” Paige Williams of Alleghany Springs Road in Shawsville said in opposition to the housing development. “It has stood in this valley for over 260 years, and my husband and I see ourselves as stewards of the history and of the land and the legacy that surround it. We love people. We want people in our community, but that type of growth transforms a place, and it would increase our population by 50%. It would singlehandedly change the culture and the composition of an entire community.”
Susan Moffett, a resident of Baltimore, Maryland, who grew up in Shawsville, also spoke in opposition to development of the property.
“You’re going into a poor community. You’re putting in these homes that they will never be able to buy…I think it’s sick,” she said. “I think it’s disgusting. I think it’s gross. It’s being built on a plantation; a place where there was human suffering and misery that we will never know.”
“There could be enslaved persons’ remains from those enslaved people; they still could be very well buried on that property,” she added.