Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Deed Restrictions Concord Square topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Land Use committee reviews amendments to Concord Square deed restrictions, including drive‑thru and sign provisions
Summary
New Castle County Land Use Committee members heard a presentation June 17 on proposed amendments to deed restrictions for Concord Square Shopping Center, tax parcel O60400005, that would remove an eastern landscaping buffer reference, repeal a clause barring sign variances, and eliminate a 1991 drive‑thru prohibition.
New Castle County Land Use Committee members heard a presentation June 17 on proposed amendments to deed restrictions for Concord Square Shopping Center, tax parcel O60400005, that would remove a reference to an eastern landscaping buffer, repeal a clause barring applicants from seeking sign variances, and eliminate a 1991 prohibition on drive‑thru facilities.
The applicant's attorney, John Tracy of Young Conway Stargate & Taylor, told the committee the changes are largely “clean up” from prior amendments related to adjacent redevelopment and common ownership. He said the eastern buffer reference can be deleted because a landscape plan implemented with recent redevelopment and common ownership makes the eastern buffer unnecessary while the northern buffer remains in place.
Why it matters: the amendments would change long‑standing deed restrictions that were adopted when the property was rezoned for a shopping center in 1991. Removing the drive‑thru prohibition and the restriction on seeking sign variances would allow future applicants to pursue those uses through the normal county processes, including public hearings before the Board of Adjustment where applicable.
Tracy said the amendment that removes the sign‑variance prohibition “doesn’t create a right to get a variance,” noting any variance would still be considered by the Board of Adjustment and other county review bodies. He also described the removal of the drive‑thru prohibition as reflecting changes in retail operations since 1991, and said the applicant had catalogued 11 drive‑thru locations on Route 202 between Sharpley Road and Damon's Road as context for the request. “That’s it in a nutshell,” Tracy said, closing his presentation.
Councilwoman Durham said she had discussed the proposal with the County Council Office of Community and Business (CCOBH) and with the Planning Board and had “not heard any other negative comments from the community.” Councilman Carter said he prefers redevelopment over greenfield development and welcomed the chance to have encumbrances heard on their merits. Councilman Hollins asked whether the project still includes a transfer to Brandywine School District; Tracy replied the transfer remains in place.
No public commenters spoke in the chamber or online during the matter as recorded in the meeting segment. The transcript does not record a formal committee vote on the amendments at this meeting.
Next steps: the applicant answered committee questions and left the committee with no formal vote recorded on June 17. If the committee moves the item forward, any future applications for sign variance or drive‑thru would require separate approvals and public hearings.
