
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: TUESDAY, March 7, 1995                   TAG: 9503070071
SECTION: CURRENT                    PAGE: NRV-3   EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY 
SOURCE: BOB ROGERS
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

RECONSIDERING PATTON'S GRANT

Editor's Note: Last week, developers of a proposed 1,400-unit retirement community that would have mixed houses, apartments, town houses and stores on 300 acres in Blacksburg and northern Montgomery County withdrew their application.

Many factors led to the withdrawal of Patton's Grant from the rezoning process in Blacksburg and Montgomery County. The decision came down to a combination of short deadlines for submitting new information requested by Blacksburg's planning and engineering staff, the perceived negative tone of the Blacksburg Town Council on Feb. 28, and concern for the health of our client in facing a very intense and probably hostile public hearing March 7.

This led to our decision to step back and say, "Whoa! We need to reconsider this!"

We appreciate local citizens' extensive public input into the project to this point, and plan to continue this process.

We thank the Greater Blacksburg Chamber of Commerce and the New River Valley Environmental Coalition for their support. We also appreciate the cooperation of town and county planners in seeking a complex yet clear (most of the time) method for reviewing the project.

We are disappointed we have not reached compatible goals with Murphy Subdivision and Apperson Park residents to complement and enhance the integrity of their neighborhoods. We continue to believe that a dialogue process of planning will lead to the best ultimate product. Patton's Grant is not dead but will be reviewed for the best ways to proceed.

We are frustrated by bureaucracy and politics, concerned about why the interest in retirement showcasing has not transferred to creating real projects, and wondering how we encourage development clients to spend thousands of dollars for a long-range vision when it is so much easier and cheaper to do "piecemeal" concepts.

As part of the development team, we have our own responsibility in dealing with the issues of this project and in having a local presence for the long run. Certain issues, such as how to limit retirement community occupancy to certain age groups, might best be resolved in conjunction with the town's goals.

Therefore, our overall concerns have to work many ways - on ourselves, our client, the larger community, and on those who make the rezoning decisions.

While I was tempted after last Tuesday's Town Council session to throw up my hands in frustration and suggest that my client go to some other locality that knows the economic benefits of retirement projects and is more welcoming to innovative projects, I believe that this is the right place for such a development and that this community needs to deal with opportunities and the future in an open and equitable way.

Now, does the community really believe this?

Bob Rogers is an architect with Architectural Alternatives Inc.

by CNB