Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Commercial Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board Moves Forward on Castlehane Road Commercial Rezoning; Applicant Asked to Correct Zoning Label
Summary
The board recommended approval of a commercial rezoning near the I-140 interchange (3419 Castlehane Road) after applicant confirmed the intended district is conditional B-2 rather than CS; staff had recommended a continuance to update advertising and analysis but the board forwarded a recommendation to the commissioners.
The Planning Board recommended approval on June 5 for a conditional commercial rezoning at 3419 Castlehane Road, near the I-140 interchange, after the applicant and staff clarified the intended district.
Staff introduced the application as a request to rezone 4.31 acres from R-20 residential to a conditional commercial district to allow a marine contractor office with warehousing and related uses. Catherine May (staff) said the parcel sits south of Chair Road with nearby commercial development and that the site is below the traffic‑impact analysis threshold. Staff noted a likely change from conditional CS (Commercial Services) to conditional B-2 (Regional Business) to meet setback requirements; both CS and B-2 would allow contractor office and warehousing uses, but the setback and buffer treatments differ. Because the application packet had a typographical error listing CS on page two, staff recommended continuing the item to the July 10 planning board meeting to re‑advertise under the correct district and ensure staff analysis matched the advertised district.
The applicant, Cindy Wolf of Design Solutions, said the CS listing on one page was an inadvertent error and that the remainder of the application, concept plan and public notices reflected B-2. She asked the board to move forward rather than continue; she emphasized the design limits uses and would be re‑advertised before the commissioners’ hearing.
Board members discussed whether staff had sufficient analysis to proceed. Staff confirmed the change to B‑2 would mainly affect setback requirements and that the planner’s analysis supporting the proposal had been completed. Board members agreed the B‑2 district is appropriate given nearby commercial uses along Castlehane Road and that staff could incorporate a condition preserving what is shown on the concept plan.
The board voted unanimously to recommend approval with conditions: maintain the plan’s shown setbacks (as required under B‑2), a six‑foot screening fence along the northern boundary of the gravel service yard, prohibition of outdoor storage within an existing utility easement, and installation of the required transitional buffer if the easement holder does not permit landscaping within the easement. Staff will ensure the case is advertised and noticed correctly in advance of the commissioners’ hearing.
