How to approach curb & gutter waivers among issues pondered as council sends items, including Swan Farm proffer amendments, to April 24 public hearings

The trials and tribulations of municipal governance were on display at a Monday, April 3rd work session of the Front Royal Town Council. Issues faced included when to draw the line on code enforcement on curb and gutter standards in the face of waiver requests in neighborhoods without existing curb and gutter; how changing town infrastructure development over years of delays in movement on the Swan Farm/HEPTAD residential project should impact proffers as that project is poised to finally begin; and how best to deal with alerting constituents to coming action items that might impact their lives or neighborhoods when those constituents don’t take advantage of existing town government methods of information dissemination.

As for Swan Farm/HEPTAD, council agreed to move forward on advertising for public hearing on proposed proffer adjustments to the April 24th council meeting. Extensive council discussion of changing development numbers and responses to questions by HEPTAD partner Ron Llewellyn and Greenway Engineering representative Marissa Shifflett begins at the 25:26 mark of the linked Town video, ending at 1:03:31.

HEPTAD member Ron Llewellyn, upper far left, gestures to make a point on the long-planned Swan Farm residential development off Leach Run Parkway. HEPTAD is seeking proffer adjustments due to changed infrastructure variables since the project was first proposed over a decade ago.

The citizen informational gap discussion came during “Open Discussion” of non-agenda topics near the end (1:41:29 video mark) of the nearly two-hour work session. Councilman Bruce Rappaport raised the issue of a constituent worried about traffic impacts of council’s recently approved Outdoor Recreation Facility at the South Fork of the Shenandoah Rivers edge on the town’s north-side at the former VFW property off North Royal Avenue Extended. The constituent had been unaware of the public hearing on the matter at the March 27th council meeting when they could have publicly raised their concerns. Vice-Mayor Wayne Sealock commented that he had the same conversation with another constituent.

Councilwoman Amber Morris noted the public hearing had, not only been advertised in print media as required by state code, but also had been “widely” circulated on social media, with written notices being sent to neighboring property owners by the Town – “It was everywhere” Morris observed. However, with it obviously having gotten by some citizens should the Town consider sending public hearing notices out with utility bills to assure a wider informational circulation, Rappaport asked his colleagues, acknowledging the extra work that could create for staff.

Mayor Lori A. Cockrell observed that citizens can sign up for text alerts of Town business and coming agenda items. How best to alert them to that option was then tackled. Mayor Cockrell also pointed to the declining positive impact of print media advertising due to the changing nature of the major area daily paper’s distribution now coming by mail, coupled with rising costs reducing circulation. “Print news is going by the wayside,” the mayor observed locally of a long-predicted 21st-century media trend.

Finance Director B. J. Wilson, upper right at podium, reviews FY-24 budget development status, noting that June penalty and interest will be delayed from June 5 to June 20 due to the late approval of a final budget impacting real estate and personal property valuations and tax responsibilities.

During a work session opening Fiscal Year 2023/24 budget process review by Finance Director B. J. Wilson, it was noted that a waiver of penalty and interest on late payments would be extended from June 5th to June 20th due to the bills again going out later than usual due to the extended budget development process. Council then moved to further discussion of the Warren Coalition’s Special Use Permit request for a substance abuse “Recovery Lodging House” at 200 North Royal Avenue (4:22 video mark to 26:00).

Council responded positively to Warren Coalition representative Christa Shifflett’s explanation of the parameters of admittance and oversight standards that will be put in place so that its presence does not negatively impact the neighborhood where it would be located. With those standards assurances council moved the SUP request to advertise for public hearing on April 24th.

The final of three action items under consideration was the above-mentioned Waiver of Curb and Gutter Request for 709 and 711 Crosby Road by Jason and Christine Sine. That discussion delved into longer-term Town plans for expansion of curb and gutter and how waivers should be applied based on existing conditions versus those long-term plans. Concern that approval of waivers for even isolated new development and sale for profit could be used by any future, larger-scale developer to cite a precedent being set for curb and gutter waivers was expressed. “Where do we draw the line?” Mayor Cockrell asked.

“Last year, we issued 37 new dwelling unit permits for the Town of Front Royal. Those were all in-fill lots. It’s not the open land up off Happy Creek or something like a large development coming in. These are just little pieces of lots that somebody bought five of them, built a house on two, and now their family is selling off what’s left. That’s what we’re seeing where you get these waiver requests from,” Planning Director Lauren Kopishke explained of applications like the Sines.

Graphics of the proposed duplex development seeking a curb & gutter waiver off Crosby Rd. near Bing Crosby Stadium. Below, a photo looking south on Crosby Rd. toward the proposed duplex site on left.

As the discussion explored the “Where do we draw the line” aspect specific issues like potential negative down-hill impacts on nearby properties was also cited as a potential reason to deny curb and gutter waivers. However, there was no indication that was an issue in the Sine request. But revisiting the long-term Town goal of expanding curb and gutter throughout the town limits, Vice-Mayor Sealock pointed out that by doing it now, as opposed to several years into the future, applicants were likely to save money — if typical inflationary patterns continue, that is.

As the discussion ended with many variables still on the table, Town Attorney George Sonnett noted that “council has to act” on the request. That prompted another consensus, this time to move the item to the April 24th meeting for action up or down on the requested waiver. According to staff that item is not scheduled for a public hearing. See that discussion in the linked video from the 1:04:40 to 1:28:23 mark.

Council then (1:28:40 mark) moved to Virginia Municipal League (VML) Policy Committee Appointments. A draft roster, albeit in Councilman Josh Ingram’s absence was developed for future meeting approval. Council wrapped the open portion of the work session up with the above-referenced 15-minute discussion of how best to alert citizens to coming council action items and associated public hearings of interest to them.

Council then convened to Executive/Closed Session for discussion of legal matters related to civil litigation it referenced as “Warren County EDA v. Town of Front Royal” which is a portion of the dueling litigations council launched several years ago disputing relative “financial scandal” liabilities related to what is still legally known as the Front Royal-Warren Count EDA, though in the wake of the Town’s withdrawal from participation in that EDA is now commonly referred to as the WC EDA which has been taken in-house by the county government.

Click here to watch the April 3rd work session.