Applicant for proposed shooting range asks council to remove 40-foot land-dedication condition

Joe Raffles, the applicant seeking a conditional use permit for a proposed community-oriented shooting range, urged the Poquoson City Council to remove or revise a planning commission condition that would require him to convey a 40-foot strip of private property along his lot’s northern edge to the city without compensation.

Raffles told the council that the condition, which the planning commission recommended, would impose an uncompensated land dedication he said raised U.S. constitutional takings concerns. “Local governments may not impose conditions on land use permits that demand [property],” Raffles said, arguing the requested road connection and the city’s long-term goal for road connectivity were separate policy matters that should not be imposed on a single property owner as a condition for exercising land-use rights.

Raffles said he and project supporters had worked with city staff and the planning commission to meet safety, noise and environmental standards for the proposed range; he asked the council to amend condition number 3 to remove a mandatory conveyance or to make any transfer voluntary and compensated. He also requested additional time to satisfy a city deadline after returning from an unplanned military deployment.

Council members expressed continued general support for the range concept but emphasized the council’s methodical approach and its reliance on legal counsel; the mayor read a prior council response that declined Raffles’s request to remove or modify a land-dedication condition and reiterated that council had set conditions and a timetable for satisfying those conditions before further consideration. No final action was taken at the meeting on the Raffles application; councilors and staff noted earlier guidance that the application would not be considered until identified conditions were satisfied and referenced a prior postponement date established earlier in the record.

Raffles asked for the council’s understanding and additional time to address legal concerns related to the condition and to meet outstanding deadlines; council members thanked him for his service and for returning to present his request.

No formal change to the planning-commission condition or to the city’s schedule was adopted at the meeting.