The concept is shown
Blue Ridge presents a concept at a WNA meeting. The presentation is not released afterward.
UPDATED · August 13, 2026
Former Woodhaven golf course
The first petition is gone. The preferred vision is now public.
Blue Ridge Cascade says the original petition is completely set aside and will not be used as evidence of community support. Its new Woodhaven Together site finally gives residents a detailed concept to review - and raises a more substantive question: how much of the development is still genuinely open to alternatives?
What changed
Blue Ridge directly resolved the biggest problem with the first petition.
Woodhaven Unites objected in July because residents were asked to support City action, TIF participation and a Resolution of No Objection before they had a shareable proposal or an open neighborhood-wide process.
On August 10, Blue Ridge Cascade Senior Director of Development Logan Hampton said the petition had been taken down and that the company intended to start fresh only after the community had a real opportunity to see and respond to a proposal. After Woodhaven Unites discovered that the old short link still worked, Hampton investigated and responded again on August 11.
Blue Ridge's August 11 clarification:
The remaining short link was an oversight; it has now been fully disabled. Blue Ridge says no responses were received after withdrawal, none of the original submissions will be used to represent community support to the City, TIF 13 or anywhere else, and the company will start fresh after residents have reviewed the proposal.
That materially changes the record, and this page has been updated to reflect it.
Survey and petition circulate through WNA
The developer's feedback links are distributed through WNA's member email channel.
Blue Ridge says alternatives remain open
Hampton says the survey is written to apply to “any version of the plan we might pursue” and that Blue Ridge is open to new scenarios based on broader feedback.
The first petition is retired
Blue Ridge confirms the old petition is being set aside completely and will not be used as evidence of support.
The preferred vision is public
WoodhavenTogether.com presents a detailed agri-neighborhood concept and says a new support petition will open after feedback and an updated plan.
Now residents can review the concept
Woodhaven Together is not a blank sheet of paper.
Blue Ridge's site repeatedly says plans will evolve and its imagery is conceptual rather than official project renderings. At the same time, the site presents a coherent preferred development program.
Community hub
A reimagined former clubhouse for events, learning, wellness and gathering.
Open space & recreation
Walking trails, green space, play areas, landscaping and public-facing improvements.
Food & agriculture
Farm-to-table dining, farmers markets, culinary education and food grown near the project.
Housing
Townhomes, live/work units and income-restricted apartments using Low-Income Housing Tax Credits.
Small business
Neighborhood-serving shops and live/work opportunities.
Public-private partnership
The site says community support and public-private partnership are necessary for the vision to move forward.
Blue Ridge's website states that conceptual imagery is intended to illustrate potential character and goals, is not an official project rendering and remains subject to change.
The new question
Still exploring alternatives - or refining a preferred plan?
Those are not the same stage of public engagement.
July 20
“Any version of the plan we might pursue.”
Hampton told Woodhaven Unites that Blue Ridge was early in the process, the survey was intentionally conceptual and the company was open to new scenarios based on feedback from residents, Councilmember Deborah Peoples and the broader community.
Woodhaven Together today
Residents are invited to shape the project's “signature aspects.”
The site describes Woodhaven Together as the developer's vision and asks residents to refine amenities, green space, naming, programming, gathering areas and other features. It says a new petition will follow after feedback and a revised site plan.
These statements are not necessarily contradictory.
A developer can have a preferred concept and still remain willing to change it. But residents should know whether fundamentally different land-use and financing scenarios remain under active consideration, or whether the central program has been selected and community input is now primarily about refinement.
Conservation Plan
The overlap is real. The website also stretches the Plan beyond what it actually says.
The Conservation Plan does support many ideas that appear on Woodhaven Together: reuse of the clubhouse, community gathering space, recreation, trails, restaurants, local businesses and a broader range of housing.
But its golf-course recommendation is more specific than a general endorsement of an agri-neighborhood. The Plan says conversations suggested golf might remain on the eastern half; if not, it contemplated low-density single-family redevelopment there. For the denser, walkable mixed-use concept, the Plan says it “focused only on the former driving range” and explicitly discusses adding market-rate rooftops and residents with spending power to support new businesses.
The Plan supports mixed-income housing elsewhere, including quality affordable housing. It does not say that the former course should become a LIHTC-supported agri-neighborhood.
And the Plan is advisory.
The City has confirmed that it was never formally adopted or incorporated into the TIF 13 financing plan, Comprehensive Plan or another formal planning document. Staff uses it as one reference when evaluating TIF 13 projects.
A number worth correcting
“Nearly 400 residents” is not what the Conservation Plan says.
WoodhavenTogether.com says “nearly 400 residents helped shape a vision for Woodhaven's future.” The Conservation Plan's own summary says the process involved nearly 400 residents, business owners, local organizations and other stakeholders.
The City's later written response says the engagement process included an advisory committee, neighborhood connectors, tours, four public-engagement sessions and a neighborhood-wide survey with 145 responses.
This does not erase the planning process. It does mean that the broader participant total should not be restated as though it represented 400 resident survey responses or 400 separate Woodhaven households.
Relevant continuity
A City lead on the Conservation Plan is now a partner at the firm presenting Blue Ridge’s Woodhaven vision.
Martha Collins was not a peripheral participant in the Woodhaven Conservation Plan. City materials identified her as the City’s Revitalization Manager and project contact, the completed Plan lists her in the City client group, and she was one of the City presenters when the completed Plan went to the TIF 13 Board in March 2025.
Collins left the City’s Economic Development Department in January 2026. She is now Chief Strategy Officer & Partner at Ten Four Films. Blue Ridge Cascade’s WoodhavenTogether.com site is credited to Ten Four Films.
Why the timing is relevant
Within months of leaving the City, a former City staff leader who helped manage and present the Conservation Plan is affiliated with the firm helping Blue Ridge present a private development that repeatedly invokes that same Plan as part of its origin story. That does not by itself establish wrongdoing, a conflict or improper conduct. It is relevant context residents should be able to see when evaluating how the public planning process is now being used to frame a private proposal.
The relevant issue is the continuity between her City role in the Conservation Plan process and her current role at the firm credited with Blue Ridge’s Woodhaven Together presentation.
Why preserve the old petition story?
Because the problem was resolved - and the correction is part of the record too.
The July petition remains a useful example of why residents should see the proposal, understand what public actions they are being asked to support and know how a response will be used before an endorsement request is circulated.
But it should no longer be presented as a live threat that Blue Ridge might use the old responses. Blue Ridge has expressly said it will not.
Woodhaven Unites will therefore preserve the historical petition documents in the Evidence Library while focusing current scrutiny on the public proposal, its financing, its consistency with the actual Conservation Plan and the alternatives that remain open.
Why methodology still matters
The 2025 Crescendo support list remains the clearest local example.
This historical zoning case is separate from Blue Ridge and is not pending. It shows why a raw support total should never be treated as a neighborhood census.
The point is not that only adjacent owners count. The point is that duplication, geography and stakeholder type materially change what a headline number can reasonably prove.
What residents should ask next
Now that the proposal is public, move the discussion from process to substance.
- Which major land-use scenarios are still genuinely open?
- How many LIHTC apartments, townhomes and live/work units are contemplated?
- What TIF participation or other public support will be requested?
- What infrastructure is public, and what remains the developer's responsibility?
- What did the Conservation Plan actually recommend for each portion of the former course?
- Before a new petition opens, will residents receive the updated plan and enough time to evaluate it?