Majority opposition restated – Supervisors delay second vote on Sheetz rezoning to June 15

“The public has spoken!” – Despite a resounding victory in February in their fight to preserve the rural nature of their neighborhood, the citizens of Apple Mountain Lake in Linden rushed to a special meeting of the Warren County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday night, May 25, ready to do battle again.  Supervisor Tony Carter, in whose Happy Creek District the property at issue lies, proposed reconsideration of the February Sheetz rezoning denial due to unanticipated costs tied to relocating a public school bus stop near the property.

Part of the Dudding Commercial Development proposal to rezone approximately 6.5 acres of a privately owned 15-acre parcel to enable a Sheetz gas station and convenience store was a proffer to maintain a school bus stop on an adjacent portion of the 15-acre property near the intersection of Interstate 66 and Apple Mountain Road that would remain undisturbed and undeveloped.

After a large majority of area residents restated their opposition and indicating alternate solutions to the school bus stop relocation issue were being developed, the board unanimously approved Carter’s motion to delay a vote to the June 15 supervisors meeting when additional information on the school bus stop issue would be available.

County Supervisors review a presentation by Sheetz representatives at Tuesday’s Special Session. Royal Examiner Photos by Stephen Sill

Observers of this process were left wondering about the underlying development rezoning request.  It appears the Board has left open the possibility of reversing its split 3-2 February decision (Cullers, Oates dissenting) to deny the rezoning. The post-public hearing consensus of Apple Mountain residents Tuesday appeared to be to pursue alternate school bus stop options, rather than reconsider the rezoning with its proffer of the previous school bus stop amenities on the involved property.

With property rights a pivotal issue for several of the supervisors, opponents of the rezoning were left to wonder whose property rights will ultimately prevail, theirs based on public health and safety concerns or the applicant property owner’s on a desired commercial use for a portion of his 15-acre property. And the current landowner is free to pursue other less potentially impactful commercial uses for the land as is. As they left Tuesday’s meeting it was agreed that citizen vigilance remained necessary until the board finalizes a second decision.

As the board opened reconsideration of the rezoning request, Sheetz Site Selector, Bob Slicker, gave a short presentation outlining the benefits of the Sheetz proposal, indicating that it would put $400,000 into county coffers, provide employment for 30-35 employees, 12-15 or more would be full-time with benefits. As previously, Sheetz touted its community mindedness and willingness to work to resolve any lingering concerns that the residents expressed.

Sheetz Site Selector Bob Slicker details the benefits Sheetz asserts it brings to the community.

Supervisor Walt Mabe asked several questions of Mr. Slicker – Has Sheetz considered any other sites in Warren County for their store?  The answer was “no.”  He also asked about security cameras, lighting, and screening trees for the site.  The developer assured the board that they would work with the county to make sure their site met all relevant standards during the permitting and construction process.

During the public hearing, a very animated crowd of citizens offered their input on the reconsideration bid, both in writing and in person.

The very few supporters of the project were far outnumbered by the opponents, as the County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors had previously found out.  Just three members of the public favored the proposal, only one in person.  All the previous concerns of the citizens, increased crime, traffic, runoff pollution, fuel tank leakage, water consumption were repeated, along with the new concern about the Board reversing its own decision.

Several questioned the rationale for revisiting the issue, indicating it further causes distrust of the citizens for their government.  The burning question was “Why would the previous decision be up for debate again so soon?”  The answer was buried in the mysterious world of “proffers”.

It is common practice for developers, in seeking to make their project more attractive to the community, to add features or extra benefits to the package.  A proffer may be something as arcane as widening an access road, adding site features for a more harmonious fit with its surroundings, or as in this case, an amenity to benefit the community – a bus shelter for the Apple Mountain Lakes community.  Currently students use a space at the entrance to the subdivision as a bus stop and turnaround point.  The current property owner withdrew his permission to use that space in the wake of February’s Board of Supervisors decision, leaving the School District no place for the safe pickup and discharge of student bus passengers.  Further inquiries indicated that the cost to replace the current site without the Sheetz project could cost the County up to $140,000.  That number drew criticism from the public, as well.

A lively crowd assembled to let the County Supervisors know how they felt about a Sheetz site at Apple Mountain Lake in Linden.

It emerged from the comments that the bus stop was an entirely separate issue from the rezoning request and the citizens urged the supervisors to resolve that problem and to leave their previous decision alone.  The School Board and Administration must assist with and approve the siting of bus stops.  This one is complicated by the need for turnaround space for the buses.

In an encouraging development, one of the Apple Mountain citizen opponents, Deanne DePyper, has organized a group to tackle the bus stop issue and has already met with the School Department and Supervisor Carter to get the ball rolling.

Apple Mountain Lake resident Deanne DePyper addresses the Board of Supervisors that the citizens are working on a practical plan for the School Bus stop relocation.

Upon the presentation of a motion to approve the initial request, the county attorney pointed out that the board need not act on the motion at all to leave the decision unchanged.

Supervisor Carter, who had remained silent throughout the meeting, then offered an alternative motion to delay action on the request until the June 15^th regular supervisor’s meeting to allow the informal group headed by Ms. DePyper to develop a plan for the bus stop to present at that meeting.  He asked for a second on that motion in order to explain his rationale.

Once Supervisor Mabe had seconded, Supervisor Carter explained that he had requested the reconsideration to resolve the bus stop issue, that the school board had attempted to obtain a right-of way for a stop at the current site and was not able to.  Estimates had been floated that put the cost of a site with shelter at $140,000, but that there were various ways to drive that cost down.  The public school budget is limited with various improvement and repair projects with urgent need, and this one would have to be considered in that light.  Carter said he supported the citizen group’s development of an alternative plan.

The Board unanimously approved the delay until June 15^th when more information on the bus stop alternatives will be available.