DATE: Wednesday, September 10, 1997         TAG: 9709100546

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B1   EDITION: FINAL  

SOURCE: BY TONI GUAGENTI AND JOHN MURPHY, STAFF WRITERS 

DATELINE: VIRGINIA BEACH                    LENGTH:  101 lines

CORRECTION/CLARIFICATION: ***************************************************************** A letter to the Virginia Beach Planning Commission recommending that the Design Advisory Group be disbanded was signed by all but one of the 11 City Council members. Councilwoman Nancy K. Parker did not sign the letter. A story Wednesday incorrectly reported that all 11 signed the letter. Correction published Friday, September 12, 1997. ***************************************************************** BEACH COUNCIL WANTS CITY'S DESIGN GROUP TO DISBAND

They have been accused of chasing a proposed Alzheimer's facility from the city.

They haggled over awning colors at a chiropractor's new office. They preferred red, not green.

Then they held up for months a Marriott hotel because they thought a slate-gray ``post-modern'' look would be better than earth-tone siding and a red brick facade.

``That was the straw that broke the camel's back,'' Councilwoman Reba S. McClanan said. ``We felt they just went too far.''

They are the six members of the Design Advisory Group, an arm of the city's Planning Commission charged with helping developers improve the looks of their projects.

Now, it appears, they've lost their charge.

The City Council signed a letter Tuesday asking the Planning Commission to disband the group, which formed about five years ago to help improve the appearance of a retirement apartment.

Since then, the group had grown from three to six members.

And, according to council members, so had the problems for developers seeking to do business in the city.

Council members blasted the group with overstepping its boundaries and becoming another layer of bureaucracy that imposed its personal views and tastes on private property owners.

``The Design Advisory Group has strayed considerably from its admirable origins,'' the letter to the commission states. ``At this point, we feel the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.''

All 11 council members signed the one-page letter.

McClanan said the group had good intentions, but, ``what we got instead were arbitrary, very expensive alterations to developments that impeded the movement of projects.''

The group was charged only with making recommendations to developers who voluntarily agreed to work with its members. It could only deal with rezoning and conditional-use permit cases.

Some of the design group's members didn't see the end coming.

``I am shocked and I am saddened that our group is probably going to be disbanded,'' said Ed Roehm, one of the group's original members and a Beach architect for the past 25 years. ``Nobody likes to tell someone that they can't do something or they have to do something different, but we stood our ground, and we made some real improvements on projects that could have been real eyesores in this community.''

B.H. ``Pat'' Bridges, another original group member, said he feels the City Council's decision is a step backward for the Beach.

``I know we did a whole lot of good work for the city,'' said Bridges, a landscape architect. ``Of course we're volunteers, we certainly didn't get paid a penny for our expertise. I'm proud of the improvements that we made.''

Kempsville Borough Councilwoman Louisa M. Strayhorn said she had received a number of complaints from new businesses about the recommendations handed out by the Design Advisory Group.

In one case, she said, a Richmond-based developer interested in building an assisted-living center in Kempsville left town in complete frustration. The group was not the only reason the business decided against locating in the Beach, but it was a primary one, she said.

``It delayed the development process and totally turned them off to the city,'' Strayhorn said.

Roehm countered: ``I can't believe a project of that magnitude would be discouraged by the comments we made. . . . We were probably the scapegoat in that one.''

Roehm also had strong words about Marriott's proposed original development, which had a look like Colonial Williamsburg's.

``Virginia Beach is hodgepodge for that very instance right there,'' Roehm said when he found out the City Council had the Marriott developers switch to the original plan.

He said the original design had no harmony or sympathy for its surroundings and the ``first-class'' Bell Atlantic building that it will be near.

R.J. Nutter II, an attorney who represented the Marriott's developers, said he thinks the group's fate was decided long before the hotel.

``In most cases the Design Advisory Group has done a great job, and only a few cases that I can think of have they really disagreed . . . (with) the council,'' Nutter said. ``Apparently it went out of sync with council's views somewhere.''

Robert J. Scott, planning director, said he would talk to the Planning Commission today at its monthly meeting about the council's recommendation.

Scott said officials are still striving to produce a city that has a quality appearance and that staff will continue to work with the Planning Commission on design standards.

With the advisory group out of the equation, Strayhorn expects the city will help serve interested developers more quickly and get better results. Roehm doesn't see that as a positive.

``We were the only layer in the government of Virginia Beach that actually tried to do something with design quality,'' Roehm said. ``It's going to be right back to business as usual.''

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu