Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning Amendment Industrial Park topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Applicant seeks rezoning amendment to allow outdoor storage and flexible development area on 2.2-acre Opel Service District parcel

5613007 · August 21, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

South Coast Investments requested an amendment to a 2014 rezoning and concept development plan for a 2.2-acre parcel adjacent to 10266 Marsh Road in Bealton, proposing a general development area that could include outdoor storage; staff said the proffer statement retains previous proffers and buffering requirements.

Staff presented a rezoning amendment request from South Coast Investments for a 2.2-acre property adjacent to 10266 Marsh Road in Bealton that is currently zoned Industrial Park (I-1) with proffers. The applicant seeks to amend the proffer statement and concept development plan approved in 2014, replacing the previously shown single building and parking with a general development area that could accommodate buildings, parking, landscaping and outdoor storage scenarios.

Staff noted the property is part of the Opel Service District, which envisions a mix of light industrial and commercial uses. The current proffer statement would retain previous commitments including a 20-foot landscape buffer for all uses, a minimum 3,000-square-foot building to allow outdoor storage, and an additional 10-foot landscape buffer when outdoor storage is proposed. Staff said the rezoning would not change allowable uses but would provide flexibility to market the site for contractors, warehouses or flex industrial users and that additional buffering should be encouraged where industrial property abuts residential areas.

Commissioners asked about sight lines and screening given changes in elevation near the interchange and whether the four example development scenarios submitted by the applicant were binding; staff answered the four were examples and had not been proffered. One commissioner said the parcel’s small size (2.2 acres) might make a laydown yard acceptable if adequately screened. Staff noted the applicant has limited development potential and that outdoor storage areas were proposed to be capped (applicant proffered that outdoor storage would not exceed 25,000 square feet). No formal vote or final action was recorded in the provided excerpt.