Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Supervisors table Valco rezoning after members question traffic study and site safety
Loading...
Summary
Facing safety concerns and questions about the applicant’s traffic impact analysis, the Cumberland County Board of Supervisors voted to table consideration of the Valco Investments rezoning (REZ‑2501) indefinitely until the applicant provides a VDOT‑compliant TIA signed by a qualified traffic operations engineer and updates proffers to follow applicable Virginia code.
The Cumberland County Board of Supervisors voted on Dec. 22 to table consideration of a rezoning application known in the packet as REZ‑2501 (Valco Investments) after supervisors and members of the public raised safety concerns about the project’s proposed access and questioned the adequacy of the applicant’s traffic impact analysis.
Administration described the project history: the planning commission recommended approval after a community meeting and subsequent review but the board had previously asked the applicant to provide a traffic impact analysis in coordination with VDOT. At the meeting, a staff summary said the applicant had returned revised proffers that included a TIA to be completed with VDOT criteria and that any recommended transportation improvements would be required as part of the development plans.
Several supervisors and a county traffic‑safety speaker said the applicant’s submitted study appeared to rely on an insufficient scope and lacked a signature from the type of traffic operations professional commonly expected for these analyses. One supervisor recommended the TIA follow the Virginia regulatory guidance cited in the meeting transcript (referred to in the record as "24 VAC 30‑one 155") and use Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation guidelines; another argued the study should be prepared or signed off by a Professional Traffic Operations Engineer (PTOE) or appropriately certified professional engineer.
Speakers described recent safety history at the intersection that would serve the project, noting multiple accidents in the past five years and a recent fatality. Board members expressed concern about limited shoulders, nearby ditches and the difficulty that large trucks can have on local roads when turning into small commercial entrances. One supervisor said the county would rely on VDOT to review any completed TIA and that costs for data gathering should be paid by the applicant.
Given those concerns, a motion was made to table setting a public hearing on the rezoning until the applicant (1) updates its proffers to explicitly follow Virginia law and VDOT TIA guidance, and (2) secures a TIA prepared or signed by a qualified traffic operations engineer; the motion was seconded and carried on recorded 'Aye' votes. The board chair and staff noted the applicant retains options to submit third‑party studies and that the board has a statutory timeline to act on applications, so staff and the applicant must monitor procedural deadlines and next steps.
The action defers the formal public hearing and any board decision until the applicant submits the requested traffic analysis and revised proffers for re‑notice or rescheduling.
