The Roanoke City Council has decided to rethink its plans to develop Countryside Golf Club.

Council members on Monday rejected revised plans to develop the 140-acre, 18-hole course. After two years of failed development efforts, it appears that the council will consider preserving Countryside as a municipal golf course -- at least for now.

The development group, including Triangle Development of Richmond, the Victor Foti Co. and Allegheny Construction of the Roanoke Valley and Mike Morgan Engineering of Midlothian, submitted a plan this spring. After a May public meeting, the city sent a letter to the group asking it to address citizens' concerns.

The development group submitted its revised plan last week, but city administrators were unimpressed.

"Upon review of it by the staff late last week, we are prepared to tell you today that this revision is quite simply a disappointment to the administration in terms of the direction that the concept took," said Brian Townsend, assistant city manager for community development.

The developers could not be reached for comment Monday.

The new concept plan replaces a nine-hole "executive" golf course with a series of soccer fields and other athletic facilities. Two stretches of single-family homes from the original plan, to be built on cul-de-sacs along the 10th and 12th fairways, have been replaced by more athletic fields, as have a number of condominiums.

In addition, a 56-acre portion of the property, originally slated for town houses and retail business, has now been replaced with a "big-box commercial" zone.

"In all candor, this concept moves us away from the original intent ... which was to increase housing options in the city, and as part of that hopefully retain some sort of golf presence," Townsend said. "We advise we should reject this proposal and not continue to move further with this development team on the golf course."

Roanoke City Manager Darlene Burcham also had strong words regarding the new proposal.

"We advised the developer on Friday of last week that this plan violated the request for proposals to which they initially responded, it did not attempt to address at all the citizens' concerns at that public meeting, and that it was a totally unacceptable plan in our minds, and that we would be sharing that position with you as a council today," Burcham said. "There's nothing redeeming about this proposal. ... We don't want to see anything else from him or this group."

This is the second would-be developer the city has courted since it paid $4.1 million for the golf course in 2005. The city bought the land because it is located along Interstate 581 and is one of the largest undeveloped tracts still left in Roanoke. Its intent was to develop the site for housing and economic development.

One developer initially responded but then withdrew. A second request for proposals yielded no response, while the third attempt drew only one response -- from the development group dismissed on Monday.

Mayor Nelson Harris said he had been encouraged by the group's initial plan.

"Their earlier plan preserved some of the golf course and had more housing," Harris said. But "rather than following the guidance that council and staff gave them, they really went in the opposite direction, which was really both puzzling and disappointing."

Valerie Garner, chairwoman of the Countryside Neighborhood Alliance, which opposes developing the course, said it has taken the city about a year to realize the developers "weren't up to par."

Other than that, she said she's glad with the outcome.

"If we're included in the public meeting, that sounds good to me," Garner said. "Hopefully we can make the case for the property being recreational use and not heavy-density development."

It does appear that council members now think it might be best to leave the land as an 18-hole golf course, at least for the time being.

Burcham suggested the city might notify Meadowbrook Golf, the Florida-based company that runs the course, that it is in a position to renew its lease for another year. Councilman David Trinkle, however, said the city might consider issuing a request for proposals to operate the course.

"It may be a good opportunity to rethink the whole municipal course option," Trinkle said. "But I want to make sure we have all the facts about the golf course in terms of its financial feasibility before we take a next step."

According to city officials, the lease with Meadowbrook requires the company to pay its own expenses but also retain its profits. As a result, the city only receives $17,500 from the land each year -- which is less than what it would receive in personal property and real estate taxes if it was still privately owned.

The council instructed city staff to gather information on the land and golf course for a future work session in which council members will discuss the best course for the future of the property. Harris said he thinks that session will most likely take place during an open, public session.

"This has been a wearying process," Councilwoman Gwen Mason said. "It would be good to have a positive plan that everybody agrees on that moves us forward. ...

"We've got some head-scratching to do."