Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Land Use Bucees topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents tell Stafford supervisors proposed Buc-ee’s location would harm neighborhoods

Stafford County Board of Supervisors · June 4, 2024
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

Dozens of Stafford County residents told the Board of Supervisors on June 4 they oppose a proposed Buc‑ee’s near Austin Ridge, citing traffic congestion, public‑health concerns over gasoline emissions, reduced quality of life and incompatibility with nearby residential zoning.

Dozens of residents urged the Stafford County Board of Supervisors on June 4 to block a proposed Buc‑ee’s convenience‑store and gas station near Austin Ridge, saying the project’s scale and location would harm traffic flows, air quality and neighborhood character.

At the afternoon and evening sessions, multiple speakers who live adjacent to the proposed site described daily traffic backups on Route 610 and nearby roads and told supervisors the location adjoins subdivisions. “We’re trying to fit a square peg into a round hole,” said Michael Stephira, a resident of Austin Ridge, who cited academic research on benzene emissions from gas‑station clusters and warned of possible long‑term cancer risks. “Gasoline contains benzene, which is a chemical classified as a human carcinogen,” he said.

Others framed the objection in community terms. “Buc‑ee’s will reduce the enjoyment of living in this county,” Jennifer Johnston told the board, listing noise, pollution and increased infrastructure stress as concerns for the Garrisonville District. Multiple speakers suggested alternative sites along Route 136 or in more commercial/industrial locations where high‑traffic truck and traveler uses would be less disruptive to homes.

Residents also questioned the economic case. Several speakers acknowledged the promise of jobs but said most would be low‑wage, short‑term positions and would not offset traffic and public‑safety costs. Russell Stegmiller described longer emergency‑response times and a growing “industrial corridor” that he said is changing the county’s residential character.

Speakers raised procedural and transparency concerns about traffic analysis and public review. Kristen Maxon and other residents urged the board to ensure traffic studies reflect peak‑period and weekend volumes and to make supporting documents readily available.

Board members did not take a final land‑use vote on Buc‑ee’s at the June 4 meetings; public comments were taken. The matter remains in staff and planning channels. Chairwoman Meg Baumke and other supervisors acknowledged the depth of public concern and said traffic, proffers and zoning compliance would be considered in future deliberations.

What happens next: The proposed Buc‑ee’s remains at the pre‑application/rezoning stage and would require any applicable rezoning, proffers or conditional‑use approvals before construction. Supervisors did not adopt a final decision on the project during this meeting.