Published: September 13, 2006 07:43 pm            

BZA upholds Roaring River plat approval

FAYETTEVILLE — It took the Fayette County Board of Zoning Appeals about 10 minutes Tuesday to settle what had been bandied about for more than five hours Monday.

The BZA voted unanimously to uphold zoning officer Tim Richardson’s approval of the Phase 1 subdivision plat for Roaring River, the larger of two planned housing developments overlooking the New River Gorge. Chairman John Hoffman recused himself from overseeing the hearing due to conflicts of interest. In his absence, member Gary Davis stepped in.

Member Clifford Ramsey said his motion that the board uphold Richardson’s ruling was made “based on conclusions of law that Section VII of the UDC was followed, and the findings of fact, of testimony and evidence presented, and also the review of the zoning officer’s approval.”

Prior to the vote, Davis said the board had never dealt with such a large-scale project but it did its best to assess the matter. “I think we’ve made a difference,” he said.

“Obviously, we’re pleased,” said Tom Wagner, Roaring River’s general manager. “I really commend the BZA members (and previous governmental entities who addressed the matter).

“What we saw was a real example of due process taking place ... to ensure we have what we planned: a responsible development.”

Attorney Tom Michael, who represents four groups that originally appealed Richardson’s approval, said another appeal to circuit court is possible but that he would have to first discuss the matter with his clients.

Joy Oakes, a representative of one of those clients, the National Parks Conservation Association, wasn’t quite as positive as Wagner.

“Tonight, the Fayette County Board of Zoning Appeals failed to take reasonable and necessary steps to protect the area’s prime attraction, the New River Gorge National River,” said Oakes, a senior Mid-Atlantic regional director for the NPCA, whose 1,300 West Virginia members includes about 50 Fayette Countians. “Instead, 80 out of almost 2,000 lots that were in dispute will now be built, partially obscuring the scenic views that lure thousands of visitors annually to our community.

“Over the past few months, LRC and Fayette County planning staff have made repeated pledges to protect the scenic beauty of the gorge as they move forward with this development. Unfortunately, tonight’s decision means that these pledges will be unfulfilled. When given the opportunity to confirm under oath that their development would not degrade the scenic beauty of the New River Gorge, LRC officials could not and would not do so.”

Cal Hite, superintendent of the New River Gorge National River, added, “Like some of the other recent decisions, I’m disappointed. I’m puzzled because in the past Fayette County has been a leader in protecting the gorge, and I felt pretty comfortable even two years ago when we first learned about this development. This underscores how big money like this can influence a decision.”

“I respect the decision of the board, however it went,” said Richardson.

- - -

In May, NPCA was joined by Plateau Action Network, West Virginia Highlands Conservancy and National Committee for the New River in appealing the first phase approval. While saying they support the development itself, opponents have asked Atlanta-based Land Resource Companies to rely on a NPS viewshed analysis and purge about 80 lots they say will negatively impact the gorge viewshed. Or, as several audience members suggested, the lots could possibly be moved to a less-obtrusive spot.

The groups were concerned that Richardson alone, instead of a 14-member planning commission, was charged with supervising subdivision regulations. In an Aug. 8 order, Circuit Judge Paul Blake said the appeal’s proper path rested with the BZA, which normally hears appeals of any contested zoning decisions, instead of the planning commission.

Tuesday’s hearing was recessed from the previous evening. Monday’s gathering involved a lot of thrust-and-parry on both sides. Much of the information had been covered in past planning commission and county commission hearings since the development was first broached in January 2005. “Frankly, we weren’t prepared for another planning commission meeting,” said Mike Basile, the attorney representing LRC. But Gene Kistler, a member of both the planning commission and PAN, cautioned that BZA members had yet to be privy to many of the details.

Michael presented several individuals who testified they are not satisfied with the entire scope of the development, which is located outside the boundaries of the New River Gorge National River. Included were Hite and Oakes, both whom expressed concerns with the impact of some of the planned houses on the area’s scenic beauty.

Michael also introduced Andy Steel, a GIS specialist with the National Park Service, and Michael Hasenmyer, an assistant professor of landscape architecture at WVU. Both men presented visual displays which analyzed possible impacts on the gorge viewshed by houses.

Hasenmyer used a visualization mode to show what the area could be like once houses are built. “Once it’s built, it’s a little too late to see what happens; you can’t take it back,” he warned. However, he did add that such visualizations can “create myths as well as truths” and that there are “infinite” vantage points from which to assess whether there will be impact or not.

“I do not fully agree with all 80 houses being removed, but I do have serious qualms (about portions of the project),” Hasenmyer concluded.

Those speaking in support of Roaring River included Bill Bihler, a certified arborist who praised LRC’s conservation vision. Also, Steve Pilato, former president of the Fayette County Board of Education, said the development would do wonders to bolster a sagging budget for the county school system and allow children to stay closer to home. “Why export the most valuable resource we have?” he asked. “I hope and pray this project will continue to move forward.”

Dave Arnold, part owner of Class VI River Runners, said many of the area’s whitewater outfitters — as members of WVPRO — support the endeavor. Calling the BZA decision “clearly a defining moment in this county’s history,” Arnold said, “We (outfitters) don’t see this as a huge issue that’s going to hurt our business.”

Audience member Alan Wickline, a Gatewood Road property owner, questioned the location of a sewage treatment plant to serve the property, and Geoff Heeter, a local business owner, took an opposite tact than Arnold. “Tourists expect a standard we hold national parks to, and (then they) look up to see houses?” Heeter said.

- - -

Michael asked the BZA to overrule Richardson on a couple of fronts. One, he said, involved a discrepancy between a 25-foot no-cut zone and an additional 25-foot vertical building buffer that should have been reflected in the subdivision plat, not simply in covenant restrictions. “He (Richardson) approved the plat the way it was handed to him,” Michael said. “Covenants can be changed tomorrow.”

Secondly, Michael urged commissioners to adhere to the park service’s viewshed analysis and technological information. Asking them to stick to “the facts on the ground,” he said they should “boil it down to common sense” and know that houses will be visible from various ground-level vantage points, contrary to LRC’s pledge they won’t.

— E-mail: skeenan@fayettetribune.com

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.