Printer-Friendly
Email this Story
Post a Comment (0)
Costco Drops Contract for Local Store
Costco Drops Contract for Local StoreBy Don Del Rosso
Times-Democrat Staff Writer
In an abrupt move last week, Costco walked away from a contract to buy land for a store near New Baltimore.
The Issaquah, Wash., retailer had an agreement to purchase about 18 acres at U.S. 29 and Route 600 from developer Cross Creek Investments LLC.
But in a letter last week to Cross Creek Investments, Costco stated it would not go forward with the deal.
In a Jan. 12 letter, John H. Foote, who represents the developer, notified Fauquier Circuit Court Judge Jeff Parker of Costco's decision.
Last week, Parker ruled that Fauquier's board of supervisors did not violate the county comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance in approving a Costco store near New Baltimore.
James Rohr, who lives near the planned Costco and shopping center site, filed a lawsuit in December 2007 against the county and the developer to stop the project.
Foote said he learned of Costco's decision on Jan. 9, before he received word of Parker's ruling.
In his letter to Parker, Foote said “I consider myself obliged as an officer of the court to advise you that on Friday, Jan. 9, I learned that Costco terminated its contract to acquire property in Cross Creek.”
He continued: “While we do not know the reasons that motivated the company, we can only surmise that current economic conditions have played a major role in its decision.”
But Foote further stated: “It is not beyond possibility that Costco would reconsider its position.”
In an interview, Foote stressed he has not talked to any Costco representatives about the decision to end the contract.
He learned about store's action from Joe Wiltse, a principal with Cross Creek Investments.
“I don't think [Wiltse] has talked to anyone” at Costco, Foote said. “He just has this [contract termination] letter.”
Wiltse couldn't be reached for comment on the contract termination.
In a prepared statement, Costco Chairman Jeff Brotman said “Our corporate policy is not to comment on specific markets.”
Amy Trotto of Broad Run, who helped organize opposition to the project, said she doesn't “know what to make” of Costco's decision to drop the contract. “Are they trying to negotiate a better deal” for the land with Cross Creek “or to discourage an appeal?” she wondered.
Costco had a contract to buy 18 acres from the developer. The planned Cross Creek Shopping Center site totals about 39 acres.
Rohr, who filed a lawsuit against to stop the project, couldn't be reached for comment on Parker's decision.
His lawyer, Charles Moss of Leesburg, refused to discuss the ruling or whether Rohr plans to appeal the decision to the Virgina Supreme Court.
Last month, Parker presided over a three-day trial in Warrenton.
Moss argued the board violated its comprehensive plan in approving a Costco store because the document seeks to preclude “big-box” stores and “destination” retailers in the New Baltimore Service District.
The Cross Creek site lies within the service district.
Moss also contended the board decision violated the county zoning ordinance, which requires that special-exception uses comply with the comprehensive plan.
The Cross Creek decision fails to meet that standard, Moss said.
County Attorney Kevin Burke represented the board. Foote represented Cross Creek.
They argued the comprehensive plan is a guide and subject to differing interpretations.
The board's interpretations of the comprehensive plan and ordinance were reasonably applied to the Cross Creek special-exception permit request, the two lawyer insisted.
Parker agreed with them.
“A careful reading of both the [comprehensive] Plan and the [zoning] Ordinance does not compel the Court to find that" the supervisors' approval of the Cross Creek special-exception permit “is in contravention of the Zoning Ordinance,” the judge wrote. “The information as submitted to [the supervisors] does not show that the proposed development's impact on the New Baltimore Service District is significantly at variance with the Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.”
Moss refused to discuss Parker's ruling.
“The final results is disappointing,” Trotto said of Parker's opinion.
Trotto believes the board's action clearly violates the comprehensive plan's prohibition of big-box stores in the New Baltimore Service District.
She also believes the board's decision also contracts an ordinance that special-exception standards comply with the comprehensive plan.
Asked whether Rohr plans to appeal Parker's decision to the Virginia Supreme Court, Trotto said “I know Mr. Rohr is looking at all of his options.”
If Rohr does challenge the ruling, Trotto said her nonprofit group, Citizens for Accountable Government, “would certainly support his decision to appeal financially, publicly, in any way.”
E-mail the reporter: ddelrosso@timespapers.com
You must be logged in to post a comment.