State commission hears opposition to Front Royal annexation plan

The Virginia Commission on Local Government heard public opposition Nov. 18, 2013, to a proposed voluntary settlement agreement that would annex roughly 604.7 acres of Warren County to the Town of Front Royal.

Chairman John G. Kines, Jr. opened the hearing at 7:06 p.m. in the Warren County Government Center and said the Commission was convened to review the negotiated settlement. Commission staff announced the hearing had been advertised in local newspapers and that mailed notice had been sent to neighboring governments and affected entities.

Zack Robbins, Commission staff, summarized the legal role of the Commission and the standard of review for negotiated boundary agreements, saying the panel is charged with holding hearings, investigating local needs and reporting findings and recommendations to the affected local governments. Robbins said the record would remain open for additional written comments through Dec. 2, 2013, and that the Commission expected to issue its report prior to the end of January 2014.

About 33 people attended the hearing and five citizens spoke. Dan McCarty, a property owner in the Shenandoah River Estates community, opposed the agreement and said his primary concern was road access during construction of the East-West Connector; he warned that rerouting traffic onto Route 606 could roughly double his travel time to the Town. McCarty later reiterated that he preferred to see no new housing in the region.

Mike Challis, another property owner in Shenandoah River Estates, also opposed the annexation and cited both access problems and concerns about whether the annexation area could be supplied with adequate water if developed.

Stan Brooks, a resident of the Town of Front Royal, said the area proposed for annexation had not been included in mandated growth zones and raised doubts about whether the settlement was in the county’s interest. Brooks argued that the East-West Connector could be built without annexation and criticized the Town for not conducting an economic or traffic impact analysis tied to the rezoning of the annexation area.

Mike Malone, a property owner on Jim’s Lane, suggested providing access to Interstate 66 via Shenandoah Shores Road as a way to address traffic congestion. Ramona Bowden, another Shenandoah River Estates property owner, said the development would destroy the scenic views from Mary Shady Lane and voiced opposition on aesthetic grounds.

Chairman Kines thanked the speakers for their comments and adjourned the meeting at 7:48 p.m. The Commission kept its record open through Dec. 2, 2013, for further written input and said it expected to deliver a written report to the affected local governments prior to the end of January 2014.