Applicant seeks fast-track reapproval of Canal Properties major site plan, contingent on parking and landscaping variances

Commercial Point Village officials on the meeting record reviewed a request from Canal Properties to reactivate a major site plan that lapsed after construction delays. Joe Perry, presenting for the applicant, said the developer had submitted the "exact same plan" that was approved in December 2021 and asked the council to waive three readings and approve the site plan this evening, contingent on two variances for on-site landscaping and parking.

Perry told the council the parking variance mirrors approvals in the surrounding industrial area and that market data used when the plan was first approved supported a reduced parking count for large speculative buildings. "We have submitted the application on behalf of Scannell and are requesting the approval of the same plan that was submitted back in 2021," Perry said during his presentation.

Council members pushed back on asking for final action tonight before the variances are resolved. A councilmember noted that approving the site plan while the variances remain pending could leave neighbors and the developer in conflict if the variances are later denied. Several members said a first-reading action or waiting for the separate variance hearings would be more prudent.

Debate focused on two technical points: parking counts and required landscaping (tree) totals. The applicant said the original approval included a higher tree count (the plan referenced roughly 523 trees) and that the variance request would reduce that number (presenters discussed a reduction to a figure near 193 trees). The applicant argued that forcing the higher tree count would "fill every square inch of the property," creating a sea of pavement pressure or impractical planting in utility easements and under transmission lines.

Councilmembers asked for revisions to bolster screening along State Route 104 and for assurances the plan leaves flexibility to expand parking if a future tenant requires more spaces. The applicant said expansion options exist for future heavy-parking users and that the parking variance had been approved for similar buildings in the area during the prior approval.

The council did not take a final vote on the site plan this evening. Instead, members urged the applicant to bring the variances forward so the council could consider the site plan with the full variance record. The council recorded that the landscape and parking variances would be considered in upcoming hearings and that final site-plan action should reflect those outcomes.

The matter will return to council once variance hearings and any required plan adjustments are complete.