Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Page County board approves special-use permit to convert Brookside into 41‑bed recovery home
Summary
After hours of public testimony, the Page County Board of Supervisors approved a special‑use permit allowing the Brookside restaurant and cabins to operate as a 41‑bed residential recovery group home, subject to negotiated conditions and state licensing and accreditation requirements.
The Page County Board of Supervisors voted to approve a special‑use permit allowing the Brookside restaurant and adjacent cabins to be operated as a group home for substance‑use recovery, a 41‑bed residential program proposed by private operators.
The decision followed more than an hour of public comment from neighbors, treatment providers and recovery advocates. Supporters said the county lacks inpatient treatment capacity and urged the board to permit a facility that would keep more residents close to family and local services. "We're not talking about bad people getting good here. We're talking about sick people getting well," said John Winslow, a Page County resident who described four decades working in addiction treatment. Treatment‑industry supporters and former clients said they expected the program to provide local jobs and fill an unmet need.
Opponents raised safety and siting concerns, including the risk of flash flooding near waterways, pressure on emergency services and the potential impact on tourism. "The word flooding doesn't seem to register with anyone's thoughts," said William Long, a neighbor who lives across U.S. 211 from Brookside, urging the board to consider location risks.
Applicant representatives and their attorney told the board the proposal maintains the existing footprint and includes multiple operational safeguards. "You have to be a Virginia resident to be allowed into this facility for [Medicaid] to pay for it," said Benjamin Cox, one of the prospective owners and operators, explaining that funding and admissions are governed by state rules, and that the program would pursue national accreditation and state licensure before operating. Cox described an accreditation process that includes an initial application (noted in the record as approximately $8,000), on‑site reviews and recurring oversight.
County staff and the applicant negotiated a set of written conditions included in the board packet (noted in the record as the draft dated 11/13). Staff highlighted condition 9, which allows the zoning administrator, "in collaboration with local law enforcement," to determine whether an operator is permitting or negligently failing to prevent illegal activity; such a determination could trigger enforcement actions up to revocation of the SUP. Staff said that provision had been vetted with counsel and with the applicant.
During board questions, supervisors pressed whether Page County residents would be given priority for beds; applicants and staff said the facility would seek to serve local residents but could not legally limit admissions exclusively to Page County because of Medicaid and licensing constraints. The record shows the applicants anticipate spending approximately $100,000 to upgrade the septic system to serve up to 41 residents, and they described 24‑hour monitoring, camera systems, transportation plans and bed‑to‑bed transfer procedures for residents who must be discharged.
After discussion the board took a motion, received a second, and the chair announced, "Motion carries," approving the special‑use permit with the draft conditions. The transcript records verbal yes/no responses from supervisors but does not present a completed roll‑call with a numeric tally in a single table.
Next steps in the record: the applicants must complete national accreditation and state licensing and meet any conditions imposed by the county before beginning operations.
