Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, June 10, 1990 TAG: 9006080184
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-1 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: CATHRYN McCUE NEW RIVER VALLEY BUREAU
DATELINE: BLACKSBURG LENGTH: Medium
One side is zoned commercial, the other residential.
There seems little doubt the zigzag line was mistakenly drawn there when the maps were done in 1988 - but where the line should go has become a point of contention between Chisholm and the town.
Chisholm, owner of Softcovers Bookstore downtown and a real estate developer, is building apartments on the site next to Burger King, geared for Virginia Tech graduate students.
He is planning about 60 efficiency units and a few 2-bedroom units.
Because he wants to target graduate students without cars, he is building only 20 limited-time parking spaces.
The project - which has been approved by the planning department - is based on a Board of Zoning Appeals ruling in April that Chisholm's property is zoned commercial.
But the town contends that the zoning line should be shifted the other direction, and follow the property line between Chisholm's property and Burger King - which would put his land in the residential zone.
Requirements generally are more strict for developments in residential zones than for commercial zones.
Although Chisholm could finish his building as planned, which would be grandfathered into the town code if the property were zoned residential, he would be restrained from doing much else.
For instance, a switch in zoning districts would take away his flexibility to rent any of the apartments to Tech for office space.
Or if the Kappa Delta sorority house on the front of his property burned down, he couldn't do anything else with that land, he said.
Town Attorney Richard Kaufman said maps from 1967 show the zoning line is the same as the property line.
"Council is simply correcting an error on the zoning map," Kaufman said, and a resolution to that effect, if passed by council, would supersede the zoning board's ruling.
"Council can locate the line wherever it wants, so long as that practice is based on good zoning principles," he said.
"What they're trying to do is illegal," said Chisholm, who said he will sue the town if the zigzag line is moved to include his land in the residential district.
Noting a section to the town code, Chisholm said the zoning board has authority to interpret any uncertainties on zoning maps. But the town did not appeal that decision to the circuit court within 30 days, as written in the town code.
Rather, Town Council voted after a closed session last month to refer the matter to the planning commission, which would make a recommendation back to council.
Immediately before that action, another resolution nullifying the zoning board's ruling and directing the town attorney to seek an injunction against Chisholm's project failed by a 3-3 vote.
Chisholm, who blasted council members for being anti-business in his unsuccessful campaign for the Town Council earlier this year, claimed that council is "trying to get back at me for running . . ." He said the council is attempting to ruin him financially "to discourage anyone from the business community from running for Town Council."
"I think he ought to be talking with us first before he talks to the newspapers," said council member Al Leighton, who voted against nullifying the zoning board's ruling.
"I don't even want to react at this point . . . until he is willing to speak to me."
Councilman Lewis Barnett said his vote last month to nullify the zoning board's ruling was not a personal attack on Chisholm.
"He may take it personally, but . . . that was not an issue," Barnett said. He said that in his opinion, the ruling in effect was a rezoning, which is beyond the zoning board's authority. Further, Town Council has taken a postion not to allow strip commercial zoning along Turner Street because of traffic and other problems.
"I don't know where those people are going to park now," Barnett said of potential tenants in Chisholm's apartment building.
"Who's going to prevent a student with a car from renting one of those apartments? I mean, it's a free country. I don't think you can discriminate against someone with a car."
Chisholm said he would not allow tenants to park overnight on the property, and the 20 parking spaces are for temporary use. Instead, student tenants would park on campus.
The planning commission last week passed the matter along to a subcommittee for consideration.
by CNB