Tuesday, July 24, 2007Blacksburg zoning board will hear big-box appealThe latest turn in the long-running community saga is set for Wednesday.The Blacksburg Board of Zoning Appeals is scheduled Wednesday to become the latest government body to make a decision about the controversial South Main Street redevelopment plan. The board, which has the authority to rule on appeals of decisions and determinations made by town Zoning Administrator Steve Hundley, will review his decision that developer Fairmount Properties of Ohio must seek special approval from Blacksburg Town Council for a retail store the company hopes to build as part of its 40-acre project. Wednesday's meeting marks yet one more battle in a long, drawn-out fight over the development, but it's unlikely to put an end to the controversy. Town Attorney Larry Spencer said the board's decision could spark further appeals regardless of which way it goes. Council members approved a rezoning last year that cleared the way for Fairmount's project along South Main Street. But after the developers later submitted site plans showing a big-box retail store -- rumored to be a Wal-Mart Supercenter -- Councilman Don Langrehr proposed Ordinance 1450, a governmental move that would limit the size of retail buildings in town to 80,000 square feet. Larger buildings could then be built only with the council's approval of a special-use permit. Fairmount's representatives say the ordinance unfairly targets their project and violates their right to develop the property. The 2006 rezoning trumps the new ordinance, they argue. And in May, Fairmount and its Blacksburg-based project partners Llamas LLC and Diversified Investors LLC took that argument to court, filing suit against the town, including its elected council and Hundley. The pre-emptive suit asked Montgomery County Circuit Court Judge Bobby Turk to protect the developers' project from the ordinance and requested that the court issue a writ of mandamus compelling the town's planning and engineering department to review final site plans for the South Main project before May 29. But the council approved 1450 in late May, and a few weeks later, Hundley ruled Fairmount must seek special approval for its retail store. Turk made his own decision on the developers' lawsuit in early July, when he ruled that Fairmount, Llamas and Diversified Investors must appeal Hundley's decision to the town's board of zoning appeals before continuing with their lawsuit. Turk also ordered last week that the town review the project's final site plans within 15 working days from the date those plans are submitted. Jim Cowan, an attorney for Fairmount, said the company has not yet submitted those plans but said he plans to do so "in the next day or two." After learning that Fairmount must argue its case before the board of zoning appeals, Fairmount principal Adam Fishman said in early July he respects the judge's decision and he and his partners "will go through the additional steps he suggested." If the appeals board affirms Hundley's decision, Cowan said his clients would "consider the BZA's findings and rulings and have the opportunity to determine if they felt it was appropriate" to go back to court. Should they choose to do that, Cowan added, "I would anticipate that they would request to have the matter heard by Judge Turk in the case that's now pending in the Montgomery County Circuit Court." It was unclear Monday if the project developers would immediately start the process to get a council vote on a special-use permit should Hundley's ruling be upheld by the appeals board. If the appeals board overturns Hundley's determination, the board could face an appeal from Blacksburg United for Responsible Growth, the anti-big-box group that successfully lobbied the council to pass 1450 through petitions, e-mails and overflowing public comment sessions. Steering committee chairman Daniel Breslau said BURG members expect the board to uphold Hundley's determination, but in case it doesn't, "we would just have to go back and talk to our attorneys and decide if we want to go ahead with an appeal." In doing so, Spencer said members would have to demonstrate they are an "aggrieved party" affected by the decision. |
.....Advertisement.....
|
